Latest Cases

Town and country planning – Permission for development. The claimant local planning authority sought judicial review of the defendant adjoining local planning authority's grant of planning permission to the interested party for a substantial urban extension of Green Belt land. The Administrative Court found four of the claimant's grounds of challenge to be wholly unarguable and gave its reasons for dismissing the remaining six grounds. 

Natural justice – Duty to act fairly. The claimant sought judicial review of the defendant local authority's decision to designate its entire borough for both additional licensing of houses in multiple occupation and selective licensing of private rented sector properties for a period of five years. The Administrative Court, in allowing the application, held that there had been a failure to consult potentially interested parties outside the borough and that the period of consultation had lasted much less that the ten-week period required to satisfy the conditions set out in the Secretary of State's general approval issued in April 2010. Accordingly, the court's discretion would be exercised in favour of granting relief. 

Natural Justice – Duty to act fairly. The claimant sought judicial review of the defendant local authority's decision to close a school and merge it with another. The Administrative Court, in allowing the application, held that the authority had failed to: (i) set out in the consultation document the alternatives considered and the reasons why they had been discounted; (ii) address the requirement that standards in the new school would be, at least, equivalent to those at the school; (iii) provide a community impact assessment with the consultation document; and (iv) provide the Regional Assembly members with the relevant documents. 

Immigration – Practice. Following the transfer of proceedings from the Administrative Court to the Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber), the present case concerned the determination of preliminary issues concerning the defendant Secretary of State's failure to serve an acknowledgement of service (AOS). The tribunal held that, in judicial review cases transferred from the Administrative Court to the tribunal, the applicable procedural regime was that contained in the Tribunal Procedure (Upper Tribunal) Rules 2008, SI 2008/2698. Further, the discretionary sanction enshrined in r 29(3) of the Rules extended to cases where the AOS had been lodged with the tribunal, but had not been served on the claimant. 

Medical practitioner – Appeal against determination of disciplinary committee. The appellant Professional Standards Authority for Health and Social Care appealed against a decision of the Conduct and Competence Committee of the first respondent Nursing and Midwifery Council's (the NMC) decision to impose a conditions of practice order on the second respondent registered general nurse for nine months. The Administrative Court, in allowing the appeal, held that the decision had been informed by a serious procedural irregularity, due to the NMC's failure to adequately reflect the seriousness of the second respondent's conduct in the charges. The matter would be remitted with a direction to the NMC that it had to amend the charges. 

Building contract – Adjudication. The claimants fitted machinery at the defendant's premises. The claimants brought proceedings for outstanding sums. An adjudicator held for the claimants, and they sought to enforce the adjudicator's decision. The Technology and Construction Court held that the contract between the parties had involved 'construction operations', and the adjudicator had had jurisdiction to decide on the dispute. 

Contract – Construction. In a dispute as to the financial consequences of delays which had occurred to the drilling of an appraisal well off the south coast of Ireland, the Commercial Court made finding in respect of, among other things, breach of contract and the recoverability of costs during the relevant periods. 

Immigration – Detention. The claimant time-served foreign national offender issued judicial review proceedings, seeking damages to reflect his unlawful detention in prison, rather than in an immigration removal centre. The Administrative Court, in dismissing the application, held that it had been unlawful for the Secretary of State to operate a blanket policy, providing criteria for detention in prison, which had ignored the circumstances of any particular case. However, R (on the application of Krasniqi) v Secretary of State for the Home Department ([2011] All ER (D) 145 (Dec)) precluded a finding of breach of art 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights. 

Immigration – Detention. The claimant national of the Democratic Republic of the Congo issued proceedings, alleging that his detention had been unlawful. The Administrative Court, in dismissing the application, held that the risk of re offending and absconding had justified the claimant's detention whilst the Secretary of State had awaited judgment in R (on the application of P) (DRC) v Secretary of State for the Home Department and another case ([2013] All ER (D) 181 (Dec)). Further, on new evidence, there had been a realistic prospect of removing the claimant after the Secretary of State had abandoned her appeal against that decision. 

European Union – Freedom of establishment. The Court of Justice of the European Union ruled that art 49 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union should be interpreted as not precluding legislation of a member state under which, on the ground of protection of the national cultural and historical heritage, costs relating to listed historic buildings could be deducted solely by owners of historic buildings situated in its territory, provided that that possibility was available to owners of historic buildings which could form part of the cultural and historical heritage of that member state despite being located in the territory of another member state.