Category: Local Government

AXA, Regina (on The Application of) v London Borough of Hackney: Admn 19 May 2021

The Claimant sought a mandatory interim injunction requiring Hackney BC to place him in ‘claimed age appropriate accommodation and provide support for his living needs’. He claims that he is 17 years 1 month. The Defendant, the London Borough of Hackney had assessed the Claimant to be aged between the age of 21 and 25 and has declined to provide him with accommodation suitable for a 17-year old.
Mr Justice Garnham
[2021] EWHC 1345 (Admin)
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 15 June 2021; Ref: scu.662644

Brooks and Burton Ltd v The Secretary of State for the Environment: 1977

Lord Widgery, Lord Chief Justice, discussed extending the concept of estoppel saying: ‘There has been some advance in recent years of this doctrine of estoppel as applied to local authorities through their officers, and the most advanced case is the one referred to by the inspector, namely Lever Finance Ltd. v. Westminster (City) London Borough Council . I do not propose to read it. It no doubt is correct on its facts, but I would deprecate any attempt to expand this doctrine because it seems to me, as I said a few minutes ago, extremely important that local government officers should feel free to help applicants who come and ask them quest ions without all the time having the shadow of estoppel hanging over them and without the possibility of their immobilising their authorities by some careless remark which produces such an estoppel’ .
Lord Widgery, Lord Chief Justice
(1977) KLGR 285
England and Wales
Cited by:
Approved – Western Fish Products Ltd v Penwith District Council and Another CA 22-May-1978
Estoppel Cannot Oust Statutory Discretion
The plaintiff had been refused planning permission for a factory. The refusals were followed by the issue of Enforcement Notices and Stop Notices. The plaintiff said that they had been given re-assurances upon which they had relied.
Held: The . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 14 June 2021; Ref: scu.652457

J Varney and Sons Waste Management Ltd. v Hertfordshire County Council: CA 21 Jun 2011

The claimant appealed against rejection of its claim for damages after alleging breach by the respondents of the 2006 Regulations.
Rix, Hooper, Stanley Burnton LJJ
[2011] EWCA Civ 708, [2011] 3 CMLR 35, [2011] BLGR 770, [2012] PTSR 670
Bailii
Public Contracts Regulations 2006 47(6)
England and Wales

Updated: 09 June 2021; Ref: scu.441051

O, Regina (on The Application of) v East Riding of Yorkshire County Council: Admn 11 Mar 2010

The applicant sought judicial review of the decision that having accommodated him at a residential school, the authority was discharged of its duties under the 1989 Act, and that he no longer had ‘looked after’ status.
Cranston J
[2010] EWHC 489 (Admin), [2010] 2 FCR 204, [2010] ELR 318
Bailii
Education Act 1996, Children Act 1989
England and Wales

Updated: 26 March 2021; Ref: scu.402593

Provident Mutual Life Assurance Association v Derbyshire City Council: HL 1981

The particular individual on whom the task of forming the relevant opinion had been imposed by statute could not possibly perform all the tasks delegated to the relevant financial officer. He had, and needed, a staff to perform his functions, and it was a member of his staff who had formed the relevant opinion. The question was not whether there had been a delegation so that the decision was not that of the treasurer but of the subordinate; the question was whether the treasurer had authorised the subordinate to act as his agent in forming the opinion.
References: [1981] 1 WLR 173
Judges: Lord Roskill
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
This case is cited by:

  • Explained – Cheshire County Council v Secretary of State for the Environment 1988
    The court was asked as to the authority of an assistant solicitor to issue an enforcement notice when the standing orders which dealt with delegated powers referred in this context, but not in others, to the County Solicitor and Secretary alone. The . .
    ([1988] JPL 30)
  • Cited – Younger Homes (Northern) Ltd v First Secretary of State and Another Admn 26-Nov-2003
    The claimant sought to quash a planning decision on the basis that a screening decision had not been made.
    Held: Though the procedures within the authority could have been bettered, there was no formal requirement for a screening option to . .
    (, [2003] EWHC 3058 (Admin))

These lists may be incomplete.
Last Update: 27 November 2020; Ref: scu.192005

Maiden Outdoor Advertising Ltd , Regina (on the Application Of) v Lambeth: Admn 9 May 2003

Notices had been issued by the defendant local planning authority under section 11 of the 1995 Act.
Held: The notices had to be quashed for several reasons. The court considered whether there was a deemed consent: ‘It seems to me that, as things stand, it is necessary to consider in relation to any particular site whether the provision of illumination does amount to a substantial alteration in the manner of the use of the site. It may or it may not, and that will depend upon the effect of the illumination in any particular case.
It is to be remembered that the approach under the Act, and under the Regulations, is that powers should be exercised only in the interests of amenity and public safety. If there is a deemed consent to an advertisement, it seems to me that it is relevant to consider, as things stand, whether the illumination does have an effect on amenity or does create a danger. If it does not in any way, it is difficult to see how it could properly be regarded within the context of the approach to construction that should be adopted of these Regulations as a substantial alteration.
It is pertinent in my judgment to have regard to the purpose behind the need for control, which is to further the interests of amenity and to avoid any danger. It may well be thought by Lambeth, and it may be perfectly reasonable so to believe, that the advertisements, even as they are, are contrary to amenity. That is a matter which may have to be considered in the future. But as the matter stands under the Regulations, there is nothing positive that could be done unless it can be established within the terms of Regulation 8 that there is a substantial effect on amenity, or a danger resulting from this. It would be right in those circumstances to consider whether the illumination creates any additional adverse effect.’
References: [2003] EWHC 1224 (Admin), [2004] JPL 820
Links: Bailii
Judges: Collins J
Statutes: London Local Authorities Act 1995 11
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
This case is cited by:

These lists may be incomplete.
Last Update: 24 September 2020; Ref: scu.185341

F and Others, Regina (On the Application of) v Wirral Borough Council: Admn 9 Jul 2009

he claims allege that the Council has unlawfully failed properly to assess the social services needs of the Claimants, to provide a care plan and to meet their care needs accordingly.
References: [2009] EWHC 1626 (Admin), (2009) 12 CCL Rep 452, [2009] BLGR 905
Links: Bailii
Jurisdiction: England and Wales

Last Update: 24 September 2020; Ref: scu.347483

Rex v The Church Trustees of St Pancras; 26 Jan 1837

References: , [1837] EngR 445, (1837) 6 Ad & E 314, (1837) 112 ER 119
Links: Commonlii
Trustees appointed under a local Act for building a new parish church, with power to make rates for that purpose and for discharging debts to be incurred under the Act, are liable to account before parochial auditors appointed under the Vestry Act, 1 &, 2 W. 4, c. 60, as a board having control over part of the parochial expenditure; though the local Act requires such trustees to keep an account of the assessments, receipts and payments under the Act, to be examined and allowed once a year at Quarter Sessions ; and though, by the same Act, their accounts are open to inspection (on payment of 1s.) by any person liable to the above rates. A mandamus calling on such trustees to produce before the auditors ‘the accounts’ (without limit as to time) kept by them under the local Act, and requiririg the clerk to the trustees to produce the books of account which may concern the above accounts, is bad, as exceeding the authority given by stat. 1 &, 2 W. 4, c. 60, ss. 34, 35, although such mandamus begin by reciting a demand made by the auditors upon the trustees in terms conformable to the Act, and a refusal to comply with such demand. When the validity of a return to a mandamus is argued on a concilium, the party impugning the return must begin, although the opposite party states that he shall object to the form of the mandamus.

Regina v The Inhabitants Of Hickling; 27 Jun 1845

References: [1845] EngR 1051, (1845) 7 QB 880, (1845) 115 ER 719
Links: Commonlii
By stat. 34 Q 3, c. 64, when the boundary of two parishes lay along the centre of a highway, justices were empowered, on information of the fact, to summon the surveyors of the respective parishes, hear the parties and their witnesses, and finally determine the matter by order, apportioning the highway between the parishes for the purpose of repair. Forms of information, summons and order were given. By an order under this Act, the justices recited an information laid before them that one side of a certain highways in, and repairable by, parish E, and the other side in, arid repairable by, parish W., praying an apportionment that they had summoned the surveyors, who attended, and that they had examined witnesses : and they ordered that the highway should be apportioned between H. & W., dividing it by a traversing line.

The King v Salway; 19 May 1829

References: [1829] EngR 473, (1829) 9 B & C 424, (1829) 109 ER 158
Links: Commonlii
By a charter of Queen Elizabeth it was provided that vacancies in the common council of the borough of L, should be filled up by election out of the ‘burgesses and inhabitants.’ The charter was accepted, but the corporation afterwards elected burgesses, not being inhabitants, to the office of common councilmen, as they had done before. This charter, and all other franchises,w ere surrendered to Car II and W & M. by a charter of restoration granted that the corporation should enjoy all franchises, elections, rights of election, &c. that they had previously enjoyed by virtue or pretence of any charter, or by any other lawful manner, right, or title: Held, that under the charter of Elizabeth, burgesses could not be elected to be common counciimen unless they were inhabitants; and that an usage to elect burgesses not inhabitants was repugnant to the charter, and could not be pleaded in explanation of it: Held, also, that the charter of W. & M. only restored such rights as had been lawfully exercised under or by pretence of former charters, and, therefore, did not enable the corporation to elect burgesses, not being inhabitants, to the office of common councilmen.

The Queen v The Inhabitants of Barnsley; 12 May 1849

References: [1849] EngR 628, (1849) 12 QB 193, (1849) 116 ER 840
Links: Commonlii
It is not necessary that a lunatic, chargeable to a parish, should be sent to an asylum or licensed house. The justice before whom he is brought is to decide whether he is a proper person to he confined or not; and, if not corifined, he may Be removed to his parish as an ordinary pauper. An idiot, aged thirty, living with his parents in parish B., became chargeable; and thereupon he and they were removed by order of justices to parish T., their place of settlement. The order was never appealed against. The father retained his house in B, in the care of two of his children, who were emancipated; and, when removed, he intended to return as soon as he could. After four days, the paupers did return to the house in B, with the consent of the overseers of T, who promised to send weekly relief to the parents for the son : but the son again became chargeable to B; and another order was made, finding the son and parents chargeable, and ordering their removal to T. The famiIy had resided in B. for five years next before the makirig of this order, excepting only the four days above mentioned. On appeal (not stating as a ground that the parents were not chargeable at the date of the second order), and case stated by the sessions : Held that the five years’ residence was broken by the removal to parish T., arid that the paupers were not irremoveable from B. under stat. 9 & 10 Vict. c. 66, s. I.

Regina v Hertfordshire County Council, ex parte Cheung; 4 Apr 1986

References: Times 04-Apr-1986
The court emphasised the need for consistency in the award of educational grants.
This case is cited by:

  • Cited – Independent Assessor -v- O’Brien, Hickey, Hickey CA (Bailii, [2004] EWCA Civ 1035, Times 07-Sep-04)
    The claimants had been imprisoned for many years before their convictions were quashed. They claimed compensation under the Act. The assessor said that there should be deducted from the award the living expenses they would have incurred if they had . .

Ex Parte Garrett and Clark v The Mayor of Newcastle; 30 Jan 1832

References: [1832] EngR 421, (1832) 3 B & Ad 252, (1832) 110 ER 95
Links: Commonlii
In the absence of any precedent, the Court refused a rule nisi for a mandamus calling on the mayor of a town to propose a resolution to the burgesses in guild assembled, for repealing certain by-laws ; though it was alleged that by-laws and ordinances might, by charter, be made, and had formerly been made, at such guilds.