Criminal Justice and Courts Bill — Clause 65 — Power to Accept Judicial Review Application In Absence of Financial Information — 1 Dec 2014 at 19:00

The majority of MPs voted not to give the high court the ability to accept an application for a judicial review if the applicant has failed to provide information about the financing of their application.

MPs were considering the Criminal Justice and Courts Bill[1]. The motion supported by the majority of MPs in this vote was:

That this House disagrees with Lords amendment 103

Lords amendment 103[2] stated:

  • Page 66, line 10, after “paragraph” insert “or, notwithstanding a failure to do so, the court in its discretion considers that it is nevertheless appropriate to grant the applicant leave to make the application for judicial review

Had it not been rejected the above text would have been inserted into Clause 65[3] following the text stating:

  • The applicant has provided the court with any information about the financing of the application that is specified in rules of court for the purposes of this paragraph.

This text was to be appended to Section 31(3) of the Senior Courts Act 1981 adding an additional prerequisite for an application for judicial review.


Debate in Parliament | Source |

Public Whip is run as a free not-for-profit service. If you'd like to support us, please consider switching your (UK) electricity and/or gas to Octopus Energy or tip us via Ko-Fi.

Party Summary

Votes by party, red entries are votes against the majority for that party.

What is Tell? '+1 tell' means that in addition one member of that party was a teller for that division lobby.

What are Boths? An MP can vote both aye and no in the same division. The boths page explains this.

What is Turnout? This is measured against the total membership of the party at the time of the vote.

PartyMajority (Aye)Minority (No)BothTurnout
Con269 (+1 tell) 2089.8%
DUP1 0012.5%
Green0 10100.0%
Independent1 10100.0%
Lab0 192 (+2 tell)075.2%
LDem42 (+1 tell) 1078.6%
PC0 30100.0%
Respect0 10100.0%
SDLP0 2066.7%
UKIP2 00100.0%
Total:315 203081.9%

Rebel Voters - sorted by party

MPs for which their vote in this division differed from the majority vote of their party. You can see all votes in this division, or every eligible MP who could have voted in this division

Sort by: Name | Constituency | Party | Vote

Geoffrey CoxTorridge and West DevonCon (front bench)no
Zac GoldsmithRichmond ParkCon (front bench)no
Sarah TeatherBrent CentralLDem (front bench)no

About the Project

The Public Whip is a not-for-profit, open source website created in 2003 by Francis Irving and Julian Todd and now run by Bairwell Ltd.

The Whip on the Web

Help keep PublicWhip alive