See R (Good Law Project) v SoS (2022) EWCA Civ 355 at para 39 on the need for promptness and speed in judicial review claims generally, and procurement challenges in particular, at para 41 on the importance of valid service of claim forms, and at paras 78-80 inclusive applications for extension of time. At para 57 the Court of Appeal says that, provided the Defendant has done nothing to put obstacles in the Claimant’s way, a potential Defendant is under no obligation to give positive assistance to the Claimant to serve. The potential Defendant can sit back and await developments. There is no duty on the Defendant to warn a Claimant that valid service of a claim form has not been effected.
Service of Judicial Review Claim Form
March 24th, 2022 by James Goudie KC in Judicial Control, Liability and Litigation
Borrowing
March 24th, 2022 by James Goudie KC in Capital Finance and CompaniesThe Combined Authorities (Borrowing) Regulations 2022, S.I. 2022/358, provide the North of Tyne, South Yorkshire and West Yorkshire Mayoral Cas with power to borrow money for any function.
Adverse Possession
March 23rd, 2022 by James Goudie KC in Land, Goods and ServicesMilton Keynes Council v Wilsher (2022) EWHC 578 (QB) restates, at para 5, the approach to be taken in determining a question of adverse possession : –
Environmental Concerns and Insolvency
March 22nd, 2022 by James Goudie KC in Environment, Highways and LeisureIn the exercise of insolvency powers, significance should be afforded to concerns by the local authority and others about damage to the environment and detriment to the locality: In the Matter of Baglan Operations Ltd (2022) EWHC 647 (Ch).
Breach of Planning Control
March 18th, 2022 by James Goudie KC in Planning and EnvironmentalOn (1) effective service of Orders, (2) proceeding in landowners’ absence, and (3) continuing interim injunction, to restrain breach of planning control, see. North Northants Council v Mangan (2022) EWHC 536 (QB).
Climate Change
March 18th, 2022 by James Goudie KC in Environment, Highways and LeisureOn the intensity of judicial review, and on the interpretation of international treaties, specifically the Paris Agreement on Climate Change, see R (Friends of the Earth) v SoS (2022) EWHC 568 (Admin).
Fixed-Term Tenancies
March 11th, 2022 by James Goudie KC in HousingIn Croydon LBC v Kalonga (2022) UKSC 7 the Supreme Court considered a local housing authority seeking possession of a secure tenancy. An unexpired fixed term is not subject to termination under Section 82(1)(b) of the Housing Act 1985 unless and until, by forfeiture or otherwise, the landlord has an existing right to terminate early under the tenancy (1) which has become exercisable and (2) any requisite steps have been taken.
Local Government Reorganisation
March 4th, 2022 by James Goudie KC in GeneralIn R (Cumbria County Council) v SoS (2022) EWHC 388 (Admin) Fordham J. refused to the County Council’s renewed application on a number of grounds for permission to bring Judicial Review proceedings against a decision of the SoS, following Statutory Guidance and consultation, to split the County into 2 unitary authorities. There was no reasonable arguability with a realistic prospect of success. The Statutory Guidance was not an unlawful departure from Government policy in relation to “minimum population size”. Nor had the SoS acted unlawfully with respect to the possibility of a Mayoral Combined Authority, the strengths and weaknesses of an East/West proposal and a single unitary proposal, or consistency with his North Yorkshire decision.
Article 8
February 24th, 2022 by James Goudie KC in Human Rights and Public Sector Equality DutyIn Craig v Her Majesty’s Advocate (2022) UKSC 6 the Supreme Court consider the “in accordance with the law” element within Article 8(2) of the ECHR. An interference with Article 8(1) guaranteed respect for private and family life is capable of being justified under Article 8(2). Such interference can be justified only if (1) it is “in accordance with the law”, (2) pursues a “legitimate aim”, and (3) is “necessary in a democratic society”. The Supreme Court explains at paragraph 49 that in order to satisfy the first of those three requirements, the interference must be in accordance with domestic law and the domestic law must meet the requirements of the rule of law, so as to afford adequate legal protection against arbitrariness. The Supreme Court states at paragraph 50 that this is an absolute requirement. There is no margin of discretion in meeting it.