Time Limit on Judicial Reviews?

[polarbear323]

Hello,

This is in relation to a case which I have already posted about (at https://legalbeagles.info/forums/for...y-wrong-ruling ) in the course of which the judge, who had not read the documentation relating to the case and therefore did not know what the case was about, came to an absurd ruling which disagreed not only with several expert witness opinions and actual technical data, but also with the Law of Gravity.

The appeal against this failed on a technicality (I was told by the Call Centre at the end of the court's published phone number that a PDF was admissible; but the court itself said that it wasn't! An example of how cost-cutting in the law gives rise to injustices.)

Therefore I have been seeking legal advice since that time, in order to have my Day in Court and to finally get Justice.

One response has been from an organisation which shall be nameless, and which advised me in an email that I should apply for a Judicial Review. I had been told elsewhere that a time limit exists on Judicial Reviews which is three (3) months from the date of the case which is in contention (in this case, the hearing was three years ago to the month). I sent an email asking if such a review could occur so long after the original case and was told in reply that "Its a continuous cause of action and can be filed" (sic).

I wondered what conventional legal wisdom makes of this. If anyone has any thoughts on this I'd be most grateful and interested to hear them.

Thanks.

[EXC]

Do you understand what a judicial review is?

I'm pretty sure that you can't issue judicial review proceedings against a court. The time limit is 3 months from the cause of action in any event.

[polarbear323]

You wrote: "I'm pretty sure that you can't issue judicial review proceedings against a court. The time limit is 3 months from the cause of action in any event."

Right, so it is three months, as I was informed previously.

The person who gave me this advice in the email (who wants my money and who styles himself "Prof. Dr.") is talking hogwash.

[lgfa92]

The CPR Practice Direction states "in any event not later than 3 months after the grounds to make the claim first arose.". Rules 54.5.

Assuming it did fall to be an issue where a judicial review application would appropriate then you'd have to prove the grounds to make a claim arose within the last 3 months. It could be read as an ongoing 'cause of action' but you'd need to demonstrate why the grounds, and thus the 3 months period, did not arise 3 years ago.