Judicial Review of Public Decisions
Introduction
The High Court in Ireland has a power or "jurisdiction" called "judicial review". Judicial review is a way for the High Court to supervise the lower courts, tribunals and other administrative bodies to ensure that they make their decisions properly.
Judicial Review is divided into two main categories:
- Conventional judicial review: Procedure governing conventional judicial review is to be found in Order 84 of the Rules of the Superior Courts 1986.
- Statutory Judicial Review: Specialised statutory schemes of judicial review relating to specific areas of public decision-making which have been singled out by the Oireachtas as warranting specialised schemes because of the policy concerns involved. Statutory schemes and the procedure involved are covered by legislation specific to that area. Statutory schemes apply to such areas as asylum, pollution control, planning and the takeover of companies.
Judicial Review of Public Decisions
Public decisions made by administrative bodies and the lower courts may be judicially reviewed by the High Court. In a judicial review, generally the court is not concerned with the merits of the decision but rather with the lawfulness of the decision-making process, that is, how the decision was made and the fairness of it.
Some examples of public decisions include:
- Decisions of the District and Circuit Courts
- Inquest verdicts
- Decisions of tribunals
- Deductions from army pensions
- Discharge of a member of the defence forces
- Disqualification from receiving social welfare payments
- Refusals of an Irish passport, marriage certificate, or visa
- Decisions to deport asylum-seekers
- Decisions of An Bord Pleanala relating to planning permission
- Decisions of Government bodies that require an Environmental Impact Assessment and/or an Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control (IPPC) licence.
- Decisions of the Legal Aid Board and the Law Society.
The basic principles of public decision-making are:
- The decision-maker must have authority to make the decision that affects you. If the decision-maker has the authority to make the decision, it must not go beyond the limits of its authority.
- You are entitled to fair procedure in how the decision is reached. This means that the decision-maker must not be biased and the decision-maker must give you a fair hearing. You must be given an adequate opportunity to present your case. You must be informed of the matter and you must be given a chance to comment on the material put forward by the other side.
If the decision-maker does not have authority or does not give you fair procedure, you may bring judicial review proceedings in the High Court to challenge the decision. You must show that you have "sufficient interest" in the proceedings, that is, that you were affected in some way by the decision you are challenging. You must also show that you have an arguable case, that is, that your case has grounds.
The High Court will examine the decision and how it was reached and will decide whether or not it was unconstitutional or illegal. The High Court may then quash or cancel the decision.
Judicial Review Procedure
Judicial Review is primarily concerned with the procedural legality of the decision but does provide for a limited review of the merits of the decision. A decision of an administrative body may be set aside on the basis that it is unreasonable or irrational.
Conventional judicial review procedure is governed by Order 84 of the Rules of the Superior Courts
Leave Stage
Judicial review involve a mandatory “leave stage”. An application for leave to bring judicial review proceedings must first be made. The leave stage is used to identify, at an early stage, claims which may be trivial or without merit. The application is made by application to the court based on a statement of grounds. This statement should set out the reasons a judicial review is sought. It should be accompanied by an affidavit.
If leave to proceed is granted, the applicant may then bring judicial review proceedings. A notice of motion should be prepared and, along with the court order granting leave to proceed with the judicial review and both the statement of grounds and the affidavit prepared for the earlier stage, served on all persons directly affected by the application.
Statement of Opposition
A respondent who wishes to oppose an application for judicial review is required to file a Statement of Opposition, and may file a replying affidavit contesting the facts set out by the applicant. Once the pleadings have closed, the matter proceeds to a hearing.
Time Limits
The judicial review procedure provides for a timely manner of reviewing the decisions of administrative bodies. Order 84, Rule 21(1) of the Rules of the Superior Courts 1986 lays down the requirements in relation to time limits in conventional judicial review proceedings. It provides that an application for leave to apply for judicial review must be made “promptly and within three months from the date when grounds for the application first arose, or six months if the relief sought is certiorari, unless the court considers that there is good reason for extending the period within which the application shall be made”. (Certiorari means to have the decision quashed.)
While there have been very few examples of cases in which judicial review has been refused on grounds of lack of promptness even within the three or six month time periods specified in the rules, this may happen. In its analysis as to whether good reason for an extension of time exists, the courts will look to the merits of the case at hand. To ensure consistency, the onus lies on the applicant to establish good reason to extend time.
Statutory schemes
Statutory judicial review schemes supplement Order 84 of the Rules of the Superior Courts with their own specific procedural rules. These statutory schemes narrow the availability of review through such features as:
- Time limits for an application for leave are shorter
- Requirements to notify the decision-maker of the leave application
- Higher thresholds applied by the High Court when considering whether to allow leave, for example, substantial grounds rather than arguable case.
Examples of statutory schemes are available in our document: Judicial review in planning and environmental matters.
How to apply
If you wish to begin judicial review proceedings, you may want to contact a solicitor who will in turn brief a barrister to draft the papers for the case. It is also possible for you to represent yourself if you wish to keep your legal costs down.
Costs
There is no fixed rate of charges for legal fees in Ireland so you should obtain some quotes before deciding on legal representation. Your solicitor must advise you in writing of the fees you will be charged for his/her services. If it is not possible to give you a definite sum, he/she must estimate a sum or at the very least describe the basis upon which charges or fees will be calculated.
In judicial review cases on decisions concerning certain environmental matters, each party to proceedings is only required to pay their own legal costs, except in certain circumstances. Further information is available in our document: Judicial review in planning and environmental matters.
Language
Related Documents
- Judicial review in planning and environmental matters
Public decisions may be judicially reviewed by the High Court to determine whether they are illegal. Find out about judicial review in the environmental and planning areas. - Commercial Court
The Commercial Court provides efficient dispute resolution in commercial cases. - Legislative background for accessing environmental information
Legislative background for accessing environmental information from a public authority.
Contact Us
If you have a question relating to this topic you can contact the Citizens Information Phone Service on 0761 07 4000 (Monday to Friday, 9am to 9pm) or you can visit your local Citizens Information Centre.