Patrick Martins, R (on the application of) v Central Family Court

Judicial review of a County Court or Family Court decision is generally inappropriate where an alternative remedy is available, including an appeal or an application to reopen an appeal. The Administrative Court will interfere with a County Court decision by judicial review only in a very rare or exceptional case. New evidence does not ordinarily justify judicial review where it can be raised through the appellate process. These principles apply even where the claimant alleges that evidence relied on below was forged or that financial disclosure was incomplete.

The claimant sought judicial review of an occupation order made by HHJ Oliver on 8 July 2024 during Family Court proceedings concerning a dispute about accommodation and the welfare of a young child.

McGowan J had refused permission for judicial review, interim relief and directions on 27 November 2024. The claimant sought oral reconsideration. He relied principally on an allegedly forged email and subsequently disclosed bank statements, contending that these matters undermined the order. The central issues were whether judicial review was appropriate despite the available appellate remedies and whether the case was sufficiently exceptional to justify intervention in a Family Court decision.

1. The application for permission to apply for judicial review was dismissed. The applications for interim relief and directions were consequently dismissed.
2. Judicial review was inappropriate because the claimant had an alternative remedy: an application for permission to appeal against HHJ Oliver’s order. That remedy had been invoked, and Henke J had refused permission and certified the application as totally without merit.
3. Interference by judicial review with a decision of the County Court is reserved for very rare cases. The issues raised did not satisfy the test for such an exceptional case.
4. Any genuinely new evidence which was not reasonably available before HHJ Oliver or Henke J should be addressed, if appropriate, by an application to reopen the appeal. The same applied to the claimant’s allegations concerning the allegedly forged email and incomplete financial disclosure.

• High Court (Administrative Court): McGowan J refused the application for judicial review, interim relief and directions on 27 November 2024. On oral reconsideration, Lavender J dismissed the application for permission and the consequential applications.
• Family Court: HHJ Oliver made the occupation order on 8 July 2024.
• High Court: Henke J refused permission to appeal against that order on 24 July 2024 and certified the application as totally without merit.