Judicial Review in England: Scope, Limitations, and Its Role in Protecting the Rule of Law and Human Rights

Abstract

This article examines the English legal system in detail and a close analysis of the English courts' role in challenging the actions of public authorities including a detailed discussion of the extent and limitations of judicial review of public bodies in England. The judicial review is an important aspect of the rule of law, which will allow public authorities to act in a lawful and fair way.Although judicial review remains very significant in the English legal system, there are still significant spaces of ambiguity and inconsistency in the demarcation of its boundaries. This lack of clarity therefore raises concerns about the effectiveness of the mechanism and maintaining an appropriate balance between the legislative, executive and judicial branch of government.

The article responds to three main questions: What is the state of judicial review in England today? What are the limits imposed on courts and what are the justification(s) for those limits? How do these factors impact on the effectiveness of the judicial review process overall? The approach employed in the research is qualitative and doctrinal with emphasis on primary and secondary sources of law such as case law, statutes, scholarly articles and official reports. A careful reading of these legal texts will help to guide on how many and to what extent the courts have the authority to review and challenge laws. The article will also take a look at the history of judicial review in England, and look at the reasons why it has progressed. Existing experiences in other jurisdictions will be further compared to identify possible areas of reform and development. The article will contribute to the understanding of the development of judicial review in England and the new boundaries of the rule, whilst highlighting the ongoing development and evolution of judicial review.