xs
This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Learn more

R v Lord Chancellor, ex parte Witham [1998] QB 575

Country:
United Kingdom
  • The Lord Chancellor (LC) tried to increase court fees with the effect that many poor people would be incapable of bringing cases.

  • A person affected by this sought judicial review, which was granted.

  • CA held that access to the courts was a constitutional right which could only be abrogated by a piece of legislation specifically allowing the LC to do so.

  • The legislation under which the LC purported to raise the fees did not do this. Accordingly the decision to raise fees was ultra vires and therefore unlawful. 

Laws J

  • It is unnecessary to refer to ECHR articles because the right of access to the courts is enshrined in domestic law through precedent.

  • This approach (finding a right substantively the same as those in the ECHR in precedent) was done with regard to free speech in Derbyshire CC v Times Newspapers.

  • It is so important a right that only an explicit parliamentary provision can allow the executive to abrogate from it. 

Any comments or edits about this case?
Get in touch