A background briefing on the judicial review process

What is a judicial review?

• Judicial review is the procedure by which individuals and organisations    can seek to challenge the decision, action or failure to act of a public    body such as a government department or a local authority or other    body exercising a public law function.

• A judicial review may be used to seek the following:
   ° a mandatory order (i.e. an order requiring the public body to do
     something and formerly known as an order of mandamus);
   ° a prohibiting order (i.e. an order preventing the public body from doing
     something and formerly known as an order of prohibition);
   ° a quashing order (i.e. an order quashing the public body's decision
     and formerly known as an order of certiorari);
   ° a declaration; or
   ° Human Rights Act damages

• Claims will generally be heard by a single judge sitting in open Court at
   the Royal Courts of Justice in London. They may be heard by a
   Divisional Court (a court of two judges) where the Court so directs.

Who will be taking this action?

• Porsche Cars Great Britain intends to seek judicial review of the Mayor
   of London's decision to increase the congestion charge to £25 for cars
   that produce CO2 emissions of 226g/km and above.

• Should Porsche file an application for judicial review, it will seek an
   order quashing the Mayor's decision.

Why is Porsche intending to take this action?

• The increase in the congestion charge from £8 to £25 - 213% - for high
   CO2 emitting cars is completely out of proportion with the rest of the
   congestion charging scheme and the CO2 savings that are anticipated
   by TfL. The rise for residents in the congestion zone will be even higher
   - people who currently pay just 80p a day will also have to pay the new
   £25.00 charge - a rise of over 3000%.

• The effect will be to decrease CO2 emissions by only a tiny percentage -
   a fraction of a percentage according to many estimates - while
   increasing the cost of living in London and hurting business. In the run
   up to a hotly contested Mayoral election the proposal appears motivated
   by politics rather than sensible policy making. TfL itself has admitted
   that the emissions savings will be minimal.

• As one of the world's leading car manufacturers Porsche feels it is time
   to draw a line in the sand on this issue. The Mayor of London has not
   thought through the consequences of his policy which will be bad for
   London at a time when economic confidence is far from certain.

What are the next steps?

• As is required by the relevant pre-action protocol, Porsche solicitors will
   be writing to the Mayor setting out Porsche's basis for challenging the
   Mayor's decision. The purpose of the letter is to identify the issues in
   dispute and establish whether litigation can be avoided. The letter will
   contain the details of the decision which is being challenged and the
   facts on which the proposed application for judicial review will be
   based. The Mayor of London will have 14 days to reply.

• Porsche will not apply for judicial review until it has received and
   considered any response to its letter or until the proposed reply date in
   its letter has passed. In the event that the Mayor does not change his
   position, the claim form for judicial review - Form N461 - will then be
   filed. It will include a request for permission to apply for judicial review;
   a detailed statement of the claimants' grounds for bringing the claim for
   judicial review; a statement of the facts relied on and an application for
   directions. Porsche and the individual claimants will also file all their
   written evidence supporting the claim and all appropriate supporting
   material.

• The Mayor of London then has 21 days to file an acknowledgement of
   the claim form which will set out the summary of grounds for contesting
   the claim and the name and address of any person considered to be
   an interested party.

• After the acknowledgement or 21 days has passed, the application for
   permission is then considered by a single judge who will then let
   Porsche, the individual claimants and the Mayor know of their decision.
   If permission is refused it is possible to request a reconsideration of
   that decision at an oral hearing.

• If permission is granted then the Mayor will have 35 days to submit
   grounds for contesting the claim and any written evidence.

• Once the time for lodging evidence has passed, the Court will provide a
   list of dates for the hearing.

What happens once the judicial review is completed?

• If Porsche is successful, the Mayor's decision to confirm the changes to
   the congestion charging scheme will be quashed. The Mayor would
   then need to consider any new version of an emissions-based
   congestion charging scheme in light of the Court's decision.

• The party which loses a substantive claim for judicial review will usually
   be ordered to pay the costs. However the Judge considering the matter
   has discretion to deal with the issue of costs as he considers
   appropriate in all of the circumstances. An appeal against the Court's
   decision can be filed within 7 days of the decision.