Indeed - unless the concern isn't with cases' outcomes but the admin/policy impacts of JR being regularly used (whether successful or not) e.g. delays, costs, pre-emptively JR-proofing policies etc. If you'll forgive a self-plug, I talk about this distinction here: academic.oup.com/ojls/advance...

With a random dig at HS2 as ‘posh spending’ thrown in for good measure

Many thanks, Colm - that’s very kind of you to say

3/3 executive power can itself chill delivery. Hopefully of interest to public lawyers but also those thinking all things infrastructure, planning, rail/transport policy
@garethdennis.bsky.social
@sfrost.bsky.social
@sophiemetcalfe.bsky.social
@samdumitriu.bsky.social
@roadscholar.bsky.social

2/3 changing from judicial power to ‘litigant power’, concerned with delay and chilling effects, which critics may make whether or not JRs succeed. This is occurring as planning becomes the new core area of political concern with JR. While compelling, I contest this and note ways that centralised