Campaigners launch first judicial review over court closure programme

The High Court will this week hear a  judicial review brought by Campaigners attempting to save Sittingbourne Magistrates’ Court in Kent from closure, the first since the Ministry of Justice's (MoJ) programme of court closures was announced in December.

The campaigners, who were granted a protected costs order in April, argue that the courts closure will require some local residents to travel for more than two hours to the nearest alternative courts in Canterbury or Chatham, in contravention of the MoJ's guidelines which stipulate that no defendant should have a travelling time of more than 60 minutes. They also claim that the Sittingbourne court is in use more than 80 per cent of the time.

Sittingbourne and Sheppey MP Gordon Henderson said: "I still believe it is the wrong decision and I hope the judicial review will find the government has acted improperly in this matter and will force ministers to reverse the closure of Sittingbourne Magistrates’ Court."

The claim is being led by Kent solicitors Robin Murray and Co with William Clegg QC of 2 Bedford Row representing the claimants at the High Court.

In the MoJ's consultation on the court closure programme, the senior presiding judge for England and Wales, Lord Justice Goldring, said that further investigation was needed before the Sittingbourne court was closed, saying that additional travelling time and costs would result in an increase in non-attendance.

UPDATE, 26th May: The High Court has reserved judgment on the case, awaiting a decision next month in a challenge to court closures in Barry, south Wales, and Cardigan being head in Cardiff.