Judicial Review must be timely
The appellant challenged the grant of permission for a wind farm on neighbouring land. His application for judicial review had been rejected for delay and on the merits.
Held: The court repeated the requirement that an application must be both timely and in any event made within three months. Both conditions apply. There was no special ‘six week’ limit for challenges to planning consents. The judge had been correct to find that the application was not timely, but that was not the only consideration: ‘If there is a strong case for saying that the permission was ultra vires, then this court might in the circumstances be willing to grant permission to proceed.’ The SEI gave a sufficient indication to any interested reader that there was raw wind data available and that it could be obtained on request. In those circumstances the information was made available in the sense required by the 2004 Regulations and by the European Directive. It follows that there was no breach of either.
Keene, Thomas, Hughes LJJ
 EWCA Civ 1067,  NPC 108,  41 EG 157,  JPL 493,  1 WLR 1687,  Env LR 17
Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (England and Wales) Regulations 1999, Civil Procedure Rules 54.5(1)
England and Wales
Appeal From – Finn-Kelcey v Milton Keynes Council Admn 17-Jul-2008
The applicant sought judicial review of the grant of planning permission for a wind farm on neighbouring land. Amongst other things he said that the information required by the order to be placed with the application had not been provided.
Cited – Regina v Cotswold District Council and others ex parte Barrington Parish Council Admn 24-Apr-1997
The parish council sought judicial review of the district council’s planning decision. The respondents complained at the lack of promptness in the application, and suggested a lack of standing to complain. . .
Cited – Regina v Independent Television Commission, ex parte TV Northern Ireland Limited CA 30-Dec-1991
An application for judicial review must be made with the utmost promptness and particularly so where third party rights may be affected. This requirement is additional to the three month limit. . .
Cited – Regina v Exeter City Council, ex parte JL Thomas Co Ltd 1990
A challenge was made to a decision of the local authority to grant planning permission for an area of land for residential development where it was surrounded by industrial works. It had no intention to arrange compulsory purchase.
Held: The . .
Cited – Regina v Swale Borough Council, ex parte Royal Society for the Protection of Birds 1991
A party seeking a judicial review has a duty to go ahead very quickly. The court considered the need for an environmental assessment in respect of the proposed development. . .
Cited – Hardy and others v Pembrokeshire County Council and Another CA 19-Jul-2006
The court considered the consequences of delay in applications for judicial review: ‘It is important that those parties, and indeed the public generally, should be able to proceed on the basis that the decision is valid and can be relied on, and . .
Cited – Regina v Ceredigion County Council ex parte McKeown Admn 6-Jun-1997
The claimant sought judicial review of the grant of planning permission for a wind farm. Laws J said that it was nearly impossible to conceive of a case in which leave to move for judicial review would be granted to attack a planning permission when . .
Cited – Regina v London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham And Others, ex parte Burkett and Another HL 23-May-2002
The applicant sought judicial review of the respondent’s grant of planning permission for a development which would affect her. The authority objected that the application was made after three months after their decision, and so leave should not be . .
Cited – Redcar and Cleveland Borough Council, Regina (on the Application of) v EDF Energy (Northern Offshore Wind) Ltd, Secretary of State for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Admn 11-Jul-2008
Sullivan J said: ‘The need for promptness in challenging planning decisions within this policy framework is particularly acute. Delay in challenging decisions in respect of renewable energy projects is more than usually prejudicial to good . .
Cited – Regina v Durham County Council and Others Ex Parte Huddleston CA 15-Mar-2000
A quarry owner had allowed his mineral extraction licence to lapse, and sought to renew the permission. The authority failed to issue a decision within the appropriate time period, and a deemed permission was granted. The UK system appeared not to . .
Cited – Faisaltex Ltd and others, Regina (on the Application of) v Crown Court Sitting at Preston and others etc Admn 21-Nov-2008
Nine claimants sought leave to bring judicial review of the issue of search warrants against solicitors’ and business and other premises, complaining of the seizure of excluded material and of special procedure material. There were suspicions of the . .
Cited – Patel, Regina (on The Application of) v Lord Chancellor Admn 27-Aug-2010
No Right to Legal Aid for Inquest
The claimant challenged the refusal to her of assistance toward her legal costs in securing representation at the coroner’s inquest into the bombings in London in July 2005. He husband was suspected of being one of the suicide bombers.
Held: . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Planning, Judicial Review
Updated: 02 November 2021; Ref: scu.276804