SQE1 judicial review: what you must know and how it is tested

SQE1 judicial review questions test whether a public decision can be challenged, on what ground, and in what time. Judicial review checks the legality of a decision, not whether it was the right one on the merits. Read it with the wider Legal System guide.

SubjectLegal System (FLK1)

Key lawSenior Courts Act 1981, s31; CPR Part 54

Question typeSingle best answer, five options

The rules to apply

Judicial review is brought in the Administrative Court under CPR Part 54. It applies to public law decisions, which means the decision-maker exercises a public function (R v Datafin). The claimant needs a sufficient interest (Senior Courts Act 1981, s31(3)). Permission is required. The claim must be brought promptly and in any event within three months of the date the grounds arose (CPR 54.5). The court may refuse permission or relief for delay even within three months. Other remedies, such as a statutory appeal, should normally be used first.

The grounds come from the GCHQ case. Illegality: the decision-maker misunderstood the law, acted beyond their powers, used a power for an improper purpose, took account of irrelevant considerations or ignored relevant ones, or fettered their discretion by applying a rigid policy. Irrationality: the decision is so unreasonable that no reasonable authority could have made it (Wednesbury), a very high threshold. Procedural impropriety: breach of a statutory procedure, or of natural justice, including the right to a fair hearing and the rule against bias. The test for apparent bias is whether a fair minded and informed observer would conclude there was a real possibility of bias (Porter v Magill). A substantive legitimate expectation may also be protected. Proportionality is applied where Convention rights are engaged.

Remedies are discretionary: a quashing order, mandatory order, prohibiting order, declaration, injunction, and damages only if combined with a private law or Human Rights Act claim. The court can suspend a quashing order or limit it to the future. It may refuse relief if it is highly likely that the outcome would be substantially the same. A clause that purports to oust the court's review is read narrowly, and an error of law is not protected by a general ouster clause (Anisminic).

Traps examiners use

Treating judicial review as an appeal on the merits.
Quoting a six month time limit. It is promptly and within three months.
Calling a hard decision irrational. Wednesbury irrationality is a very high bar.
Missing fettered discretion when an authority follows a policy without exceptions.
Forgetting that a private law dispute, such as a contract with a public body, is not public law.
Forgetting that remedies are discretionary.

Worked question 1

A council adopts a rule that it will refuse every application for a street trading licence without considering the facts of each. Isla's application is refused under the rule. On what ground is a judicial review claim most likely to succeed?

A. Irrationality, because the decision is unreasonable.
B. Illegality, because the authority has fettered its discretion by applying a rigid policy.
C. Procedural impropriety, because Isla was not heard orally.
D. Legitimate expectation, because the policy is published.
E. Proportionality, because it is a harsh decision.

Answer: B. A body given a discretion must consider each case and may not adopt a blanket policy with no room for exceptions. That is a form of illegality. A is a very high threshold, and C, D and E need facts that are not given.

Worked question 2

A council makes a decision on 5 January. Pierre believes it is irrational and seeks permission for judicial review on 12 May of the same year. Which statement is correct?

A. He is in time because the limit is six months.
B. He is in time because the limit is three months from knowledge of the decision.
C. He is probably out of time, because the claim must be brought promptly and within three months, and permission may be refused unless there is a good reason.
D. He is in time, because there is no time limit for public law claims.
E. He is in time because the limit runs from the date he instructed solicitors.

Answer: C. CPR 54.5 requires promptness and no later than three months after the grounds arose. Pierre waited over four months, so he needs good reasons to extend. A and D misstate the rule, and E has no basis. B is close but the time runs from when the grounds arose and promptness is also required.

Checklist before you move on

Is it a public law decision by a public function?
Time: promptly and within three months.
Standing and alternative remedy.
Which ground: illegality, irrationality, procedural impropriety?
Is Convention law engaged (proportionality)?
Remedy and discretion.

Test yourself on more original questions in our SQE1 practice questions.

Try a free SQE1 question

Questions

What is the time limit for judicial review?

The claim must be brought promptly and in any event within three months of the grounds arising, under CPR 54.5.

What are the grounds for judicial review?

Illegality, irrationality and procedural impropriety, with proportionality and legitimate expectation applying in some cases.

Does judicial review decide whether a decision was right?

No. It decides whether the decision was lawful. The court does not substitute its own view on the merits.

Sources: SRA: SQE1 Assessment Specification (from 1 September 2026); Senior Courts Act 1981, section 31; CPR Part 54. Checked 10 November 2026.