Public bodies in Ireland — departments, councils, tribunals, regulators — make thousands of decisions a day that change people’s lives: refusing an application, revoking a licence, ordering a deportation, granting a neighbour’s planning permission. Judicial review is the mechanism the law provides when one of those decisions is made unlawfully. Under Order 84 of the Rules of the Superior Courts, the High Court supervises how public power is exercised — and can quash decisions, compel action and stop unlawful conduct.
Process, Not Merits
The single most important thing to understand: judicial review examines how the decision was made, not whether it was the right decision. The court asks whether the body had the legal power it purported to exercise; whether it followed fair procedures — hearing your side, deciding without bias; whether it gave reasons; whether it took the right matters into account; and whether the decision was rational and proportionate. If the answer is no, the usual outcome is that the decision is quashed and sent back to be made again, lawfully. That is often exactly what the applicant needs — a second, fair hearing — but it must be understood from the start. Read more: judicial review vs appeal.
The Grounds
- Acting outside powers (ultra vires): the body did something the law never authorised, or misread the law it was applying;
- Breach of fair procedures: you were not heard, not told the case against you, or the decision-maker was biased;
- Failure to give reasons: you cannot tell why you lost — a free-standing ground since the Supreme Court’s modern case law;
- Irrationality and disproportionality: the decision flies in the face of reason or crushes rights more than its purpose requires;
- Legitimate expectation: the body promised or consistently practised one thing, then did another to your detriment.
Each ground is explored in our guides: grounds for judicial review, fair procedures, failure to give reasons and legitimate expectation.
The Remedies
The court’s toolkit: certiorari quashes the unlawful decision; mandamus compels the body to act or decide; prohibition stops unlawful action before it happens; declarations state the legal position authoritatively; and injunctions preserve the situation while the case runs — often critical in deportation and demolition cases. Damages are available only in limited circumstances alongside these remedies. See the remedies explained.
Time Limits: The Rule That Outranks the Rest
The general limit is three months from when grounds first arose, with extensions only for good and sufficient reason arising from circumstances outside your control. Shorter limits govern the busiest areas: broadly eight weeks in many planning cases and 28 days in many immigration and international protection cases. Promptness is expected even within the limits.
Judicial review time limits are strict, are sometimes much shorter than three months, and can run from an earlier date than you expect. The courts can refuse late applications even within the stated period if you have not acted promptly. Nothing on this page calculates your deadline. If you believe a decision affecting you may be unlawful, contact a solicitor immediately.
Think a Decision Was Made Unlawfully?
One call establishes the time limit, whether an appeal must come first, and whether your grounds are arguable.
Call 01 5827148