Who is talking about a judicial review?
A chap I know has recently won an appeal at Crown Court against his certificates being revoked and it cost less than £2000. BASC recommended the barrister, but that was all.
That sounds a realistic sum on the lower end of the scale, however if the appeal had been dismissed the bill may have been considerably more.
Before an appeal to the Crown Court can be made there must have been a refusal by the police to grant/renew/vary a firearm or shotgun certificate. The grounds for such a refusal (or revocation) must be stated by the police. Not unless and until such time as a refusal (etc.) on the grounds of this current medical report debacle, has been delivered (to a BASC member) could BASC consider launching an appeal. I do not know whether such refusal has been made yet.
In the absence of such a refusal (etc.) BASC nor any other shooting organisation or individual would not have a case to appeal.
In the absence of an appeal as outlined above, processes or procedures that are unfair/unjust/unlawful etc. etc. can be taken to judicial review.
Sooner or later, if the police actually refuse to grant/renew/vary/etc. a firearm or shotgun certificate, on the grounds that the applicant would not pay for a medical report, I am confident that one of the organisations will jump at the chance of an appeal to the Crown Court.
Assuming the appeal to be allowed, such a decision would not be binding on other courts nor would it set a precedent for other appeals.
Having said that, it would certainly cause the police to take due notice.
Furthermore, the police could decide to appeal against that decision, which would place the matter in the higher courts. That is where Crown Court costs pale into insignificance, particularly if the hearing is protracted.
I hope this is helpful as it is based on considerable practical experience and a fair summary of the situation as I understand it.
