Putting the Brakes on Infrastructure? Judicial Review Challenges to HS2 and the Critique of ‘Litigant Power’

A growing critique regards judicial review as inhibiting infrastructure delivery on the basis of what I term 'litigant power', which may come to represent the dominant political critique of judicial review under the Labour administration. This differs from classic concerns of judicial power, focusing on how legal challenges by project opponents-notwithstanding their doctrinal outcome-can produce delay and embed a chilling overcaution among industry and policy makers. Having articulated the litigant power critique alongside judicial power, the article explores judicial review's impacts on infrastructure delivery through a case study of the legal challenges to England's High-Speed 2 railway project. I argue this litigation presents little evidence of judicial overreach, but in some ways supports litigant power concerns. Nevertheless, I suggest the litigant power critique risks oversimplification, especially in view of the radical reform often proposed, and it also downplays chilling effects associated with the constitution's centralisation of government decision-making power.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Oxford Journal of Legal Studies
Published
2025-01-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/ojls/gqaf015
Primary Topic
Regulation and Compliance Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Putting the Brakes on Infrastructure? Judicial Review Challenges to HS2 and the Critique of ‘Litigant Power’

Sam Guy
Oxford Journal of Legal Studies
Regulation and Compliance Studies
article

Putting the Brakes on Infrastructure? Judicial Review Challenges to HS2 and the Critique of ‘Litigant Power’

Sam Guy
article en

Abstract

A growing critique regards judicial review as inhibiting infrastructure delivery on the basis of what I term 'litigant power', which may come to represent the dominant political critique of judicial review under the Labour administration. This differs from classic concerns of judicial power, focusing on how legal challenges by project opponents-notwithstanding their doctrinal outcome-can produce delay and embed a chilling overcaution among industry and policy makers. Having articulated the litigant power critique alongside judicial power, the article explores judicial review's impacts on infrastructure delivery through a case study of the legal challenges to England's High-Speed 2 railway project. I argue this litigation presents little evidence of judicial overreach, but in some ways supports litigant power concerns. Nevertheless, I suggest the litigant power critique risks oversimplification, especially in view of the radical reform often proposed, and it also downplays chilling effects associated with the constitution's centralisation of government decision-making power.

Oxford Journal of Legal StudiesVol. 45(3)
Openalex Percentile: Top 84%
Regulation and Compliance Studies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Putting the Brakes on Infrastructure? Judicial Review Challenges to HS2 and the Critique of ‘Litigant Power’ — Sam Guy · Oxford Journal of Legal Studies (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS