UK Palestine Action terrorism act challenge will go ahead with additional grounds of review
20 October 2025
The UK Court of Appeal has rejected an appeal brought by the UK Government against the High Court’s decision granting Palestine Action permission to challenge its proscription by judicial review – R (Ammori) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2025] EWCA Civ 1311.
Palestine Action was proscribed under the Terrorism Act 2000 in July 2025. Its co-founder, Ms Ammori, is challenging this decision by judicial review against the lawfulness of its proscription. The Government argues that Palestine Action should challenge its proscription by applying to the Proscribed Organisations Appeal Commission (POAC). In July 2025, the High Court rejected an application by Palestine Action for interim relief pending the main hearing and granted it permission for judicial review on 2 grounds – that the Home Secretary failed to consult Palestine Action before proscribing it, and that proscription is a disproportionate interference with the right to freedom of speech and assembly under the ECHR.
The UK Government appealed against that judgment. The Court of Appeal rejected the Government’s appeal, saying:
- Sections 4 and 5 of the Terrorism Act are designed to allow a person to challenge the continued proscription of an organisation and to bring that proscription to an end. They are not a means of challenging the lawfulness of the initial decision to proscribe the organisation.
- The procedure established by Parliament is for deproscription by applying to POAC. Parliament has not established a statutory procedure for challenging the lawfulness of a decision to proscribe.
- An application for deproscription is not an alternative remedy to judicial review of a decision to proscribe.
- The urgency of the case meant judicial review is appropriate to swiftly determine whether the decision to proscribe the group was lawful.
The Court also gave permission for 2 additional grounds of judicial review to be heard at the main hearing in November. This means the 4 grounds that will be heard are:
- That the Home Secretary failed to consult with Palestine Action before proscribing it.
- That the proscription is a disproportionate interference with the right to freedom of speech and assembly.
- That the Home Secretary failed to have regard to relevant mandatory considerations based on English public law principles.
- That the Home Secretary failed to follow her published policy when proscribing Palestine Action.
See our UK judgments page for the High Court’s decisions in this case.
