If the High Court can, through judicial review, invalidate earlier decisions of itself and lower courts where they are found to have been made in a procedurally improper way, and if the House of Lords can do the same thing in respect of its decisions, who has jurisdiction to review the Court of Appeal? If the answer is, as some might say, "no court can review the procedural work of the Court of Appeal" is that fair? This article gives a critical analysis and opinion on that question
When a trial court sets aside a verdict and grants a new trial, the order may or may not be reviewab...
When exercising judicial review, the courts, on occasions, have intervened in circumstances where ad...
It would seem a truism to state that the object of courts of justice is to do justice between the pa...
Recently, there have been considerations for reform of criminal appeals in both England and Wales an...
The difference between appeal and review is familiar to Southern African lawyers: appeal challenges ...
Is appealing a legal decision ever worth the additional, time, money and emotional investment? What ...
This study seeks to find an explanation for the two main problems associated with the Criminal Divis...
This article deals with the limitations of judicial review and the possibilities of its augmentation...
This article concerns the little-known and rarely-exercised power of the Criminal Cases Review Commi...
One of the main criticisms of the criminal division of the Court of Appeal has been that it is defic...
An academic consensus exists that the England and Wales Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) determin...
This paper makes the point that a court decision that is open to an appeal is akin to a take-it-or-l...
Over the past 30 years judicial review of jurisdictional error has changed dramatically, from the de...
Considers the reasons for restricting the Administrative Court's judicial review powers to public la...
This paper challenges the commonly held idea that the appeals process lowers the occurrence of legal...
When a trial court sets aside a verdict and grants a new trial, the order may or may not be reviewab...
When exercising judicial review, the courts, on occasions, have intervened in circumstances where ad...
It would seem a truism to state that the object of courts of justice is to do justice between the pa...
Recently, there have been considerations for reform of criminal appeals in both England and Wales an...
The difference between appeal and review is familiar to Southern African lawyers: appeal challenges ...
Is appealing a legal decision ever worth the additional, time, money and emotional investment? What ...
This study seeks to find an explanation for the two main problems associated with the Criminal Divis...
This article deals with the limitations of judicial review and the possibilities of its augmentation...
This article concerns the little-known and rarely-exercised power of the Criminal Cases Review Commi...
One of the main criticisms of the criminal division of the Court of Appeal has been that it is defic...
An academic consensus exists that the England and Wales Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) determin...
This paper makes the point that a court decision that is open to an appeal is akin to a take-it-or-l...
Over the past 30 years judicial review of jurisdictional error has changed dramatically, from the de...
Considers the reasons for restricting the Administrative Court's judicial review powers to public la...
This paper challenges the commonly held idea that the appeals process lowers the occurrence of legal...
When a trial court sets aside a verdict and grants a new trial, the order may or may not be reviewab...
When exercising judicial review, the courts, on occasions, have intervened in circumstances where ad...
It would seem a truism to state that the object of courts of justice is to do justice between the pa...