Judicial review restricted

The government's latest reform to the justice system appears to be an attempt to limit the use of judicial review. It includes a large increase in the fee payable for a hearing in person, a reduced time limit for bringing judicial review proceedings of planning decisions, and banning some applicants from having a hearing in person if their initial application is held to be without merit.So, is this a necessary set of measures to prevent the abuse of judicial review and stop its use to delay immigration and planning decisions, and help economic growth into the bargain?Or is it an attack on the rule of law which will restrict the right of citizens to challenge decisions made by the government? A great topic to stimulate debate!Some members of the House of Lords, including the eminent Lord Pannick, think the change will actually result in an increase in applications - one to file under the law of unintended consequences? Video clip here from 8 mins 40: http://www.bbc.co.uk/democracylive/house-of-lords-22268607