Judicial review

[tedebear]

which means an appeal against the decision's terminology and reasoning as opposed to a review into how the decision was made - if I'm correct Lord B?

 

[Lord Bracknell]

Section 288 (1) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990:-


"288. Proceedings for questioning the validity of other orders, decisions and directions

(1) If any person—

(a) is aggrieved by any order to which this section applies and wishes to question the validity of that order on the grounds—

(i) that the order is not within the powers of this Act, or

(ii) that any of the relevant requirements have not been complied with in relation to that order; or

(b) is aggrieved by any action on the part of the Secretary of State to which this section applies and wishes to question the validity of that action on the grounds—

(i) that the action is not within the powers of this Act, or

(ii) that any of the relevant requirements have not been complied with in relation to that action,

he may make an application to the High Court under this section."

 

[110%]

Section 288 of the 1990 Town and Country Planning Act sets out that an application can be made to the High Court to question the validity of an action or decision by the Secretary of State.

There are other sections which provide similar powers to challenge other aspects of planning, such as the validity of a local plan.

Where there is no specific power but someone feels that the correct procedures have not been followed/something unlawful has occurred then they can launch a judicial review of the decision.

It all basically boils down to the High Court being asked to review the situation and make sure the actions/decisions are valid.

 

[sully]

I am now totally confused


Where does the idea of a Judicial review come into it?

What is the High Court session if not a judicial review?

I'm glad I'm not alone on that score!!

From the LDC website, I get this "The proposed action in the High Court is not an appeal. It is a procedure provided in the planning legislation to challenge the validity of any action on the part of the Secretary of State in relation to a planning decision. The Secretary of State has very wide powers to make decisions about planning matters as long as he keeps within planning policies and the law".

http://www.lewes.gov.uk/faqs/6988.asp



So is it an appeal or not! AAAARRRRRGGGGGHHHHH!!


BTW, they also say: "This is not a judicial review. It is a procedure provided in the planning legislation to challenge the validity of any action on the part of the Secretary of State in relation to a planning decision."

http://www.lewes.gov.uk/faqs/6986.asp

 

[sullyupthewing]

If anyone one is interested there is some info here about about JR and planning.
http://www.earthrights.org.uk/legalbriefing.html

 

[The Oldman]

If anyone one is interested there is some info here about about JR and planning.
http://www.earthrights.org.uk/legalbriefing.html

Thanks for that and the author of the piece was the lawyer acting for Falmer Parish Council.

 

[tedebear]

Section 288 (1) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990:-


"288. Proceedings for questioning the validity of other orders, decisions and directions

(1) If any person—

(a) is aggrieved by any order to which this section applies and wishes to question the validity of that order on the grounds—

(i) that the order is not within the powers of this Act, or

(ii) that any of the relevant requirements have not been complied with in relation to that order; or

(b) is aggrieved by any action on the part of the Secretary of State to which this section applies and wishes to question the validity of that action on the grounds—

(i) that the action is not within the powers of this Act, or

(ii) that any of the relevant requirements have not been complied with in relation to that action,

he may make an application to the High Court under this section."

Thanks for that although I was looking for more of a yes no sort of answer... to this .......LDC are making an appeal against the decision's terminology and reasoning as opposed to a review into how the decision was made? - if I'm correct Lord B?

or are you playing the artful dodger?