The claimant challenged the introduction of new rules for the storage of metals for the members of the respondent, which was anticipated to lead to a fall in the price of aluminium. They said that the consultation process had been procedurally unfair.
Held: The consultation was unfair principally for two reasons: (1) it was procedurally unfair because it did not explain the principal option that had been rejected, namely the rent ban option, and (2) there had been inadequate investigation of the rent ban option prior to the consultation.
Phillips J
[2014] EWHC 890 (Admin)
Bailii
England and Wales
Cited by:
Appeal from – United Company Rusal Plc, Regina (on The Application of) v The London Metal Exchange CA 8-Oct-2014
The excange produced new rules for its members which had adversely affected the appellant. The appellant had sought orders as to the validity of the new rules. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Contract
Updated: 11 December 2021; Ref: scu.523303
