Judicial review: keeping it simple

In brief

• The appellate routes from the magistrates’ court are: judicial review, stating a case, and appeal to the crown court.
• Outlining the appellate routes from the magistrates’ court.
• Practically exploring, and practically advising on, each route’s relative merits.

Despite being perhaps the most commonly-frequented court by second-six pupils and junior counsel, the magistrates’ court is not always the most procedurally straightforward. Nor are the routes of recourse open to the disgruntled defendant in crime cases always as clear as they should be. This article aims to summarise and synthesise this situation as it stands, in order to provide some general advice, and specific tips for responding to the common client question of, ‘what next?’ post-verdict (or sentence).

Traditionally, R v Hereford Magistrates’ Court, ex p Rowlands [1998] QB 110 suggests:

• Errors of fact (or a mixture of fact and law) lead to appeal to the crown court.
• Errors of law, or a lay bench exceeding their jurisdiction, lead