Pub Date : 2023-01-02DOI: 10.1080/10854681.2023.2189405
Tatiana Kazim, Joe Tomlinson
1. Though much of it remains out of sight, it is no secret that the use of automated decision-making systems in government is now widespread and growing. In practice, many such systems are partially, rather than fully, automated; there is a ‘human in the loop’. In such a system, there are a range of downstream risks in respect of the quality of administrative decision-making. One such potential risk is automation bias – a welldocumented psychological phenomenon whereby decision-makers put too much, or inappropriate, trust in computers and thus effectively abdicate to some extent their own discretionary judgement. The question of how judicial review may respond to this risk is on the horizon.
{"title":"Automation Bias and the Principles of Judicial Review","authors":"Tatiana Kazim, Joe Tomlinson","doi":"10.1080/10854681.2023.2189405","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10854681.2023.2189405","url":null,"abstract":"1. Though much of it remains out of sight, it is no secret that the use of automated decision-making systems in government is now widespread and growing. In practice, many such systems are partially, rather than fully, automated; there is a ‘human in the loop’. In such a system, there are a range of downstream risks in respect of the quality of administrative decision-making. One such potential risk is automation bias – a welldocumented psychological phenomenon whereby decision-makers put too much, or inappropriate, trust in computers and thus effectively abdicate to some extent their own discretionary judgement. The question of how judicial review may respond to this risk is on the horizon.","PeriodicalId":232228,"journal":{"name":"Judicial Review","volume":"53 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122687041","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-02DOI: 10.1080/10854681.2022.2167419
Matthew Psycharis, A. Mills
1. The result of the 2014 referendum on Scottish independence was a – fairly narrow – rejection of the proposal for Scotland becoming independent at that time. However, there remained a high level of support for independence. As is well-known, whilst the UK as a whole voted to leave the EU in the 2016 referendum, a majority of voters in Scotland voted to remain in the EU. As the House of Lords Constitution Select Committee has stated, ‘[t]his prompted calls for a second independence referendum by the Scottish Government, which were rejected by the UK Government on the grounds that this was not a priority during the implementation of Brexit and the response to COVID-19’.
{"title":"The Scottish Parliament, the Supreme Court, and an Independence Referendum?","authors":"Matthew Psycharis, A. Mills","doi":"10.1080/10854681.2022.2167419","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10854681.2022.2167419","url":null,"abstract":"1. The result of the 2014 referendum on Scottish independence was a – fairly narrow – rejection of the proposal for Scotland becoming independent at that time. However, there remained a high level of support for independence. As is well-known, whilst the UK as a whole voted to leave the EU in the 2016 referendum, a majority of voters in Scotland voted to remain in the EU. As the House of Lords Constitution Select Committee has stated, ‘[t]his prompted calls for a second independence referendum by the Scottish Government, which were rejected by the UK Government on the grounds that this was not a priority during the implementation of Brexit and the response to COVID-19’.","PeriodicalId":232228,"journal":{"name":"Judicial Review","volume":"3 11 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122771572","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-02DOI: 10.1080/10854681.2023.2188812
Edward Lui
1. Much of the contemporary academic writings on reason-giving in administrative law scholarship concern whether there may be ‘a general duty to give reasons’ in common law. The current position in English law is that no such general duty exists, although exceptionally the decision-maker may nevertheless be required by common law to give reasons. The present article does not seek to further this debate. It seeks instead to address a short point that has received scarce attention in the academic literature, but which can have significant theoretical and pragmatic implications on reason-giving in English administrative law. It is what I will call the ‘procedural qualifier’ to reason-giving. It will be contended here that the procedural qualifier to reason-giving should be rejected.
{"title":"Reason-giving for Procedural Decisions: The Case Against the Procedural Qualifier","authors":"Edward Lui","doi":"10.1080/10854681.2023.2188812","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10854681.2023.2188812","url":null,"abstract":"1. Much of the contemporary academic writings on reason-giving in administrative law scholarship concern whether there may be ‘a general duty to give reasons’ in common law. The current position in English law is that no such general duty exists, although exceptionally the decision-maker may nevertheless be required by common law to give reasons. The present article does not seek to further this debate. It seeks instead to address a short point that has received scarce attention in the academic literature, but which can have significant theoretical and pragmatic implications on reason-giving in English administrative law. It is what I will call the ‘procedural qualifier’ to reason-giving. It will be contended here that the procedural qualifier to reason-giving should be rejected.","PeriodicalId":232228,"journal":{"name":"Judicial Review","volume":"8 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116734089","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-02DOI: 10.1080/10854681.2023.2179294
Rebecca Sage
2. The Bill sought to introduce ‘safe access zones’ around abortion clinics in Northern Ireland. At cl 5(2)(a), the Bill made it an offence to ‘to do an act in a safe access zone with the intent of, or reckless as to whether it has the effect of – (a) influencing a protected person, whether directly or indirectly [...]’. A ‘protected person’ was defined as including those attending clinics to access treatment, information, advice or counselling, those accompanying such a person at their invitation, and those working in or providing services to the clinic (cl 3).
{"title":"Protest and Proportionality in the Supreme Court: A Significant ‘Preliminary Issue’","authors":"Rebecca Sage","doi":"10.1080/10854681.2023.2179294","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10854681.2023.2179294","url":null,"abstract":"2. The Bill sought to introduce ‘safe access zones’ around abortion clinics in Northern Ireland. At cl 5(2)(a), the Bill made it an offence to ‘to do an act in a safe access zone with the intent of, or reckless as to whether it has the effect of – (a) influencing a protected person, whether directly or indirectly [...]’. A ‘protected person’ was defined as including those attending clinics to access treatment, information, advice or counselling, those accompanying such a person at their invitation, and those working in or providing services to the clinic (cl 3).","PeriodicalId":232228,"journal":{"name":"Judicial Review","volume":"216 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"134237800","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-02DOI: 10.1080/10854681.2022.2167423
J. Maurici
{"title":"Legal Analysis of the UK Government’s Closure of Schools in England in 2020 and 2021 – Part 1","authors":"J. Maurici","doi":"10.1080/10854681.2022.2167423","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10854681.2022.2167423","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":232228,"journal":{"name":"Judicial Review","volume":"48 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128436137","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-10-02DOI: 10.1080/10854681.2022.2138043
James E. Hurford
2. In truth, the main horror of Nineteen Eighty-Four – aside from the IngSoc regime’s combination of totalitarian brutality and pettifogging bureaucracy – is The Party’s manipulation of thought and language. Airstrip One’s government spends considerable effort erasing and redefining words, to eliminate ideas unacceptable to the regime, enforcing its will through the brutal Thought Police. Towards the conclusion, the protagonist Winston Smith is interrogated by Thought Police agent O’Brien, who demands that Smith confess that O’Brien is holding up five fingers on his left hand, while in reality he is only holding up four.
{"title":"A Tale of Pronouns, ‘Gay Cakes’ and Conscience: Compelled Speech After Mackereth v DWP","authors":"James E. Hurford","doi":"10.1080/10854681.2022.2138043","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10854681.2022.2138043","url":null,"abstract":"2. In truth, the main horror of Nineteen Eighty-Four – aside from the IngSoc regime’s combination of totalitarian brutality and pettifogging bureaucracy – is The Party’s manipulation of thought and language. Airstrip One’s government spends considerable effort erasing and redefining words, to eliminate ideas unacceptable to the regime, enforcing its will through the brutal Thought Police. Towards the conclusion, the protagonist Winston Smith is interrogated by Thought Police agent O’Brien, who demands that Smith confess that O’Brien is holding up five fingers on his left hand, while in reality he is only holding up four.","PeriodicalId":232228,"journal":{"name":"Judicial Review","volume":"58 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"124751611","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-10-02DOI: 10.1080/10854681.2022.2154484
Christopher J. Monaghan
a human account of the litigation,
对诉讼的人性化描述，
{"title":"Returning to Bancoult: New Perspectives","authors":"Christopher J. Monaghan","doi":"10.1080/10854681.2022.2154484","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10854681.2022.2154484","url":null,"abstract":"a human account of the litigation,","PeriodicalId":232228,"journal":{"name":"Judicial Review","volume":"58 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121818517","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-10-02DOI: 10.1080/10854681.2022.2156209
Fiona Barrett
1. With reports in the press last month that the ‘UK Covid inquiry bill [is] already at £85 m as government hires top law firms’, a figure arrived at before the public hearings have even commenced, the cost and proper scope of the legal profession’s involvement in what is expected to be the widest-ranging and longest-running statutory inquiry in UK legal history rightly continues to be the source of anxious scrutiny by the media and wider public.
{"title":"Judicial Review and Public Inquiries – Procedure, Case Studies and Some Observations on the (Long) Covid Inquiry","authors":"Fiona Barrett","doi":"10.1080/10854681.2022.2156209","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10854681.2022.2156209","url":null,"abstract":"1. With reports in the press last month that the ‘UK Covid inquiry bill [is] already at £85 m as government hires top law firms’, a figure arrived at before the public hearings have even commenced, the cost and proper scope of the legal profession’s involvement in what is expected to be the widest-ranging and longest-running statutory inquiry in UK legal history rightly continues to be the source of anxious scrutiny by the media and wider public.","PeriodicalId":232228,"journal":{"name":"Judicial Review","volume":"10 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"117207598","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-10-02DOI: 10.1080/10854681.2022.2165776
Lee Marsons, Gabriel Tan
They provide a reasoned record of the outcome for parties to the dispute, they facilitate transparency around the exercise of judicial power, they inform potential litigants of how their potential claim might fare, they structure the operation of government, and … they provide an important part of an evidence base that allows the system of judicial review itself to be understood and evaluated. 41
{"title":"Levelling Up Judicial Review: Regionalising the Administrative Court in England","authors":"Lee Marsons, Gabriel Tan","doi":"10.1080/10854681.2022.2165776","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10854681.2022.2165776","url":null,"abstract":"They provide a reasoned record of the outcome for parties to the dispute, they facilitate transparency around the exercise of judicial power, they inform potential litigants of how their potential claim might fare, they structure the operation of government, and … they provide an important part of an evidence base that allows the system of judicial review itself to be understood and evaluated. 41","PeriodicalId":232228,"journal":{"name":"Judicial Review","volume":"313 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122798679","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-10-02DOI: 10.1080/10854681.2022.2167427
Catherine Dobson, R. Keating, Gethin Thomas
3. Lord Carnwath, former Justice of the UK Supreme Court, was quoted as expressing ‘disappointment’ that the question of legal enforcement of States’ climate change obligations did not form part of the discussions in COP 26. Long an advocate of the central role that courts should play in promoting compliance with international and national environmental obligations, Lord Carnwath said that the UK has a ‘good story to tell’ on the world stage when it comes to legal enforcement and the role of legislation in tackling climate change. Have the UK courts lived up to that reputation in 2022?
{"title":"Sectoral Update: Environmental Law","authors":"Catherine Dobson, R. Keating, Gethin Thomas","doi":"10.1080/10854681.2022.2167427","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10854681.2022.2167427","url":null,"abstract":"3. Lord Carnwath, former Justice of the UK Supreme Court, was quoted as expressing ‘disappointment’ that the question of legal enforcement of States’ climate change obligations did not form part of the discussions in COP 26. Long an advocate of the central role that courts should play in promoting compliance with international and national environmental obligations, Lord Carnwath said that the UK has a ‘good story to tell’ on the world stage when it comes to legal enforcement and the role of legislation in tackling climate change. Have the UK courts lived up to that reputation in 2022?","PeriodicalId":232228,"journal":{"name":"Judicial Review","volume":"105 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"117229527","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：