No automatic right to a renewed oral permission to appeal hearing—an unlawful restriction of access to justice? In short, no. (R on the application of Faiz Siddiqui v Lord Chancellor)

Case analysis 1010 – R on the application of Faiz Siddiqui v Lord Chancellor

The Civil Procedure Rules 2016 removed the automatic right to a renewed oral application for permission to appeal to the Court of Appeal. The change was primarily aimed at reducing the court’s growing workload and was not without criticism from commentators concerned that it would operate as a constraint on access to justice. This case considers the balance between ensuring access to justice in light of the restriction on the right to an oral hearing. It was determined that such a restriction, which was subject to a number of safeguards contained both within the justice system and the Civil Procedure Rules, did not lead to a breach of Article 6 of European Convention on Human Rights, nor a breach of the common law right of access to justice.

First published by LexisNexis on 12 April 2019

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s