CWJ, R (on the application of) v Director of Legal Aid Casework & Anor

CWJ, R (on the application of) v Director of Legal Aid Casework & Anor

The Director of Legal Aid Casework did not err in law in refusing exceptional case funding because the review panel proceedings did not involve the determination of a civil right under Article 6, Article 8, or Article 2 Protocol 1 ECHR, as no such claims were raised or determined in those proceedings. The 2023 ECF Guidance is not unlawful as it does not authorise or approve unlawful conduct, is not misleading, and does not impede access to justice.

Parties
Claimant: CWJ; First Defendant: Director of Legal Aid Casework; Second Defendant: Lord Chancellor; Intervener: MIND
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
14 February 2025
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Final Judgment After Substantive Hearing
Outcome
Claim dismissed; permission to amend refused in part
Legal Topics
Judicial Review, Legal Aid, Exceptional Case Funding, School Exclusion, Discrimination, Public Sector Equality Duty, Article 6 ECHR, Article 8 ECHR, Article 2 Protocol 1 ECHR, Article 14 ECHR
Administrative Law Education Law Human Rights Law Judicial Review Legal Aid Exceptional Case Funding School Exclusion Discrimination +5 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 27 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

CWJ

Claimant

Director of Legal Aid Casework

First Defendant

Lord Chancellor

Second Defendant

MIND

Intervener

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Final Judgment After Substantive Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Director of Legal Aid Casework erred in law in refusing exceptional case funding for representation before a school exclusion review panel
  2. 2 Whether the Lord Chancellor's 2023 Exceptional Case Funding Guidance (Non-Inquests) is unlawful for failing to address relevant Convention rights and discrimination issues

Ratio Decidendi

The Director of Legal Aid Casework did not err in law in refusing exceptional case funding because the review panel proceedings did not involve the determination of a civil right under Article 6, Article 8, or Article 2 Protocol 1 ECHR, as no such claims were raised or determined in those proceedings. The 2023 ECF Guidance is not unlawful as it does not authorise or approve unlawful conduct, is not misleading, and does not impede access to justice.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed; permission to amend refused in part

Orders

  • Permission granted to amend claim form and statement of facts and grounds only as to challenge to the second review decision
  • Application for judicial review of the second review decision dismissed