Home Immigration Services Judicial Review

Judicial Review, Scotland

In Scotland, judicial review actions and proceedings can be initiated by a person with sufficient interest in a particular case. Where the decision maker, often a public body like the Scottish Government or a tribunal, is challenged on grounds of legality, failure to act, or breach of statutory duty, within the statutory time limit of three months, seeking legal remedies such as overturning the decision, with the Court of Session and the Upper Tribunal playing crucial roles in upholding justice under Scots law. Administrative law plays a crucial role in reviewing the lawfulness of these administrative decisions.

If you disagree with a decision by the Home Office, and other methods of dispute resolution haven’t worked, you may be able to seek a judicial review.

If you believe a decision by the Home Office is unlawful, unreasonable, or procedurally incorrect, you can challenge this through a Judicial Review.

Solicitors from Jones Whyte will be able to support you throughout the review process and represent you in court.

While Judicial Reviews are designed to look at the lawfulness of a Home Office decision, you cannot introduce new evidence during the review.

The scope of the review is limited to the lawfulness of the decision, meaning that the court will examine whether the decision was made in accordance with the law, whether it was reasonable, and whether proper procedures were followed.

It will not re-evaluate the facts of the case or consider new information

Contact Us

Judicial Reviews – definition

Judicial Review provides an opportunity for an individual to challenge the lawfulness of a government decision.

These decisions can include those made by:

Central government.
A government department.
Regulators.
Local authorities.
Other public bodies that are performing a public function.

Scotland judicial review

Judicial review proceedings

Judicial Review stands as a vital legal mechanism for individuals to challenge the lawfulness of government decisions. It serves as a cornerstone of accountability, ensuring that public authorities act within the bounds of the law. Jones Whyte solicitors are adept at guiding individuals through the complexities of a judicial review action, providing unwavering support in their quest for justice.

What are the three grounds for judicial review?

Its traditional duty is to ensure only that these decisions were lawful, procedurally fair and rational. The most common reasons to seek legal review are illegality, irrationality, and procedural unfairness.

A government department.
Regulators.
Local authorities.
Other public bodies that are performing a public function.

Most cases are settled following negotiations stemming from the pre-action protocol letter. In fact, navigating through the pre-action protocol process is often a prerequisite before pursuing a Judicial Review.

The Judicial Review process, can unfold over several months, if not longer. It underscores the importance of attempting to resolve issues through negotiation before resorting to court proceedings.

If a Judicial Review claim proves successful, the decision at hand must be quashed or nullified, prompting the need for a reconsideration.

Jones Whyte’s adept solicitors are equipped to provide steadfast representation throughout the Judicial Review proceedings. With a deep understanding of court procedures and a wealth of experience, we endeavor to resolve matters in your favor.

Contact Jones Whyte’s immigration lawyers today to explore your legal options and secure the representation you deserve.

Administrative law review

Depending on the type of decision at hand, individuals may opt to pursue an administrative review as an alternative to a judicial review.

The administrative review process provides a platform for individuals who have applied for entry clearance or a UK visa but have faced refusal to challenge this decision. It offers a mechanism for recourse when individuals believe their applications were unfairly rejected, providing an avenue for scrutiny and potential rectification.

In many cases, decisions may be deemed incorrect due to errors in case handling or processing. Consequently, individuals retain a legal right to challenge negative decisions impacting them, irrespective of the original decision-makers involved. This underscores the importance of administrative review as a means of safeguarding individual rights and ensuring procedural fairness in immigration matters.