Number of judicial review applications at “highest” since 2017, Government data shows

In an analysis of civil justice statistics for the fourth quarter of 2025 (October to December), the MoJ revealed that 640 of the applications were classed as ‘civil (other)’, while 420 were civil immigration and asylum cases. The remaining 30 applications were criminal.

A 'statistician's comment' attached to the Ministry of Justice’s analysis noted that the 56% increase for Q4 last year represented the "highest level since Q1 2017, driven by a rise in civil (other) and civil immigration and asylum applications".

Overall, 3,700 judicial review applications were made in 2025. Of these, 1,300 were civil immigration and asylum applications, 2,200 were civil (other), and 130 were criminal.

Civil (other) judicial review applications rose by 25% compared with 2024, while civil immigration and asylum applications increased by 26%. Criminal judicial review applications fell by 6%.

Of the applications made in Q4 2025, 12% have now been closed. A total of 170 cases have reached the permission stage, of which 21 were found to be totally without merit.

The Home Office received the largest number of judicial review applications in Q4 2025, with 390 applications. Of these, three have so far been granted permission, or granted permission in part, to proceed to a final hearing.

Local authorities were the second largest recipient, receiving 320 applications during the same period. Of these, 23 (7%) have been granted permission, or granted permission in part, to proceed to final hearing.

The third largest recipient was the Ministry of Justice, which received 130 applications. Of these, five (4%) have so far been granted permission, or granted permission in part, to proceed to final hearing.

Commenting on the rise in applications, Nicola Mead-Batten, Partner at law firm TLT, said: "There are likely to be multiple factors in play – almost a stretched catapult effect post-Covid of normal service absolutely resuming, and in earnest, possibly being one factor.

"In our recent experience, we’ve actually seen a number of incidences of multiple judicial reviews being brought by different stakeholders affected in slightly different - sometimes competing - ways in relation to the same policy development, and a rise in commercial judicial reviews where there is too much at stake for businesses not to challenge a decision adverse to them."

She added: "Furthermore, with increasing use of tools such as fundraising platforms and the prospect of deploying protective costs orders in cases, people now feel they have more to gain and less to lose in bringing these cases.

"There is also increased social media discussion and coverage in relation to government decision-making which is likely drawing the attention and support of a wider cross section of the public than might otherwise be reached."

Adam Carey