Published: 9th September 2026 In July 2026 the Ministry of Justice proposed extending the Nationally Significant Infrastructure Project (NSIP) judicial review regime to a limited number of other planning judicial reviews. This would make it more difficult to bring judicial reviews in some planning cases. In August 2026 the Public Law Project (PLP) submitted a response raising concerns that there is not adequate evidence that it is in the public interest for these reforms to be extended to other planning regimes. Read the evidence here Summary PLP disagrees that the NSIP judicial review regime should be extended to other planning judicial reviews. As judicial review is one of the UK’s most important constitutional mechanisms for promoting the rule of law and ensuring public bodies remain within their legal powers, it should only be restricted where there is clear evidence and a compelling reason in the public interest. The Government has clearly stated that it is unclear such evidence exists, as a result the Government should not proceed with these proposals on constitutional and evidential grounds. Academic opinion at the time of the then Government’s original call for evidence supports PLP’s position. Bringing judicial reviews in the planning context is already a challenge. For example, there is a statutory time limit of 6 weeks (compared to the usual three months) to issue a planning claim in the Administrative Court. It remains unclear how these proposals will detrimentally impact people with protected characteristics. PLP is concerned that extending the NSIP regime to other planning judicial reviews will be used by this or future administrations to justify expanding the restrictions to further judicial reviews still. The more widely the net is cast, the greater the risk to access to justice and the rule of law – simply because there are more claims at issue.