Judicial review

If we can help you with a judicial review risk or challenge, let us know

Through our time in both private practice and the public sector, in New Zealand and (in Richard’s case) overseas, we have considerable experience and expertise in administrative law, in-depth knowledge of public sector mechanisms and constraints and invaluable experience in how to mitigate risk. We have undertaken legal research, analysis, preparation of pleadings and submissions, and in some cases have appeared as junior counsel, for government agencies in high profile and high value judicial review proceedings.


  • Managed and provided multiple legal inputs into the Commerce Commission’s successful defence of the Powerco and Vector judicial review proceedings arising out of the Gas Control Inquiry (Richard).
  • Core member of solicitor team (at Ashurst, London/Frankfurt) acting for pharmaceutical company in appeal against a Final Appraisal Determination of the United Kingdom’s National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (the available appeal grounds were akin to judicial review grounds) (Richard).
  • Core member of solicitor team (at Ashurst, London) advising a UK market research company in relation to potential intervention in judicial review proceedings against the Secretary of State for guidance (regarding anonymised prescription data) which was ultimately held to be wrong in law (R v Department of Health ex parte Source Informatics Ltd (2001) QB 424) (Richard).
  • Core member of solicitor team (at Ashurst, London) advising broadcaster in judicial review of the Independent Television Commission in relation to broadcasting rights to football matches (R v Independent Television Commission, ex parte TVDanmark [2000] EWHC Admin 389 (HC), [2001] 1 WLR 74 (CA) and subsequently appealed to the House of Lords) (Richard).
  • Junior counsel and key researcher in a number of the proceedings in the Roussel Uclaf v PHARMAC judicial review litigation (Richard).
  • Core team member and junior counsel in the separate Hoechst Marion Roussel (NZ) Ltd v PHARMAC proceedings (Richard).
  • Acting as junior counsel, including conducting research and drafting pleadings and submissions, in judicial review proceedings brought against ACC and the Nursing Council (Genevieve).
  • Core team member in Electoral Commission v Cameron [1997] 2 NZLR 421 (CA) (Richard).
  • Advice in connection with the only whole of government direction issued under section 107 of the Crown Entities Act 2004 (Richard).
  • Advice on consultation procedures (Richard).
  • Richard has written numerous articles on judicial review and presented judicial review training, e.g., “Rationalising Judicial Review of Commercial Decisions” (1997) LawTalk 19; “Consultation Obligations” [1999] New Zealand Law Journal 192; “Great Expectations – Learning from Coughlan” [1999] British Journal of Health Care Management 463; “Pharmaceutical Subsidisation and Judicial Review of the National Institute for Clinical Excellence” (2001) 7 Journal of Commercial Biotechnology 237; “Challenging Pharmaceutical Regulatory Decisions on Safety Grounds” (2004) Regulatory Affairs Journal (Pharma) 3; presentation at NZLS Judicial Review Intensive (1997).

If you'd like to get to know us or discuss something over coffee, drop us a line.