Reason I ask is that I’ve just learned the noxious neighbors in my five year planning nightmare have been cleared to apply to the HIgh Court for a Judicial Review
Are any AWers lawyers/barristers or have any knowledge about Judicial Reviews and sub judice regulations?
Sorry can’t be more specific but do not want to jeopardize the sterling work the council’s hopelessly underfunded and overstretched planning dept and its legal team have carried out thus far.
No, but had you considered a sawn-off shotgun?
Just one secondhand experience – hope you have Job-like patience and unlimited funds. Don’t envy you but a’ the best.
Just had a quick read about judicial reviews.
How many judicial review cases are there, and how many are successful?
In 2018, some 3,597 claims for judicial review were lodged1 (commenced) in the High Court. However, most cases do not get very far, because a claimant must convince the court that they have an “arguable” case in order to be granted permission to proceed to a full hearing.
Only 184 cases, or about 5% of total cases commenced, reached a full oral hearing in 2018. The rest were mostly refused permission to proceed, withdrawn, or resolved out of court.
Of the cases that did proceed to a full hearing, the government body under challenge won 50% and lost 40%. The other cases were mostly withdrawn or have not yet reached a conclusion.
Hope you get a satisfactory conclusion.
Cheers, for the positive advice, @Hubert-Rawlinson, and to everyone else for their encouraging comments. Apologies again for having to tip-toe around the issue for reasons which will become clear further down the page.
The Judge’s approval of the noxious neighbours’ application for a JR was larded with obvious caveats.- His highlighting of the ‘very low’ threshold their grounds for appeal (mainly minor procedural points) satisfied being the most prominent.
The beak also made it clear that if their application was successful, the resultant JR would take a lot of time in reaching and passing through court and would likely cost a great deal of money as it did so. Current waiting list for court dates for JRs here is apparently two years.
My gut feeling is they’re just doing what they’ve been doing for the last five years and using every avaiilable loophole (and there are an awful lot of them) to delay the inevitable and have to pull their structures down.
While I’m not a named party in the case and not liable for any costs, I was the person who reported the problem and have been mentioned in proceedings several times. As a result, I think it is better to be safe than sorry and be very circumspect as to what I say/write.
My big worry is that the council decides enough is enough and throws in the towel; and, in doing so, throws open the door for loads of other cynical developers to start buying up and ruining other formerly unspoiled rural areas.
Given that the council and its legal team are seriously understaffed and underfunded, I am also trying my hardest not to derail the progress they’ve made by running my mouth off in an attempt to generate public awareness of the case and its implications.
All a bit Jarndyce vs Jarndyce, I know, but sometimes you have to stand up for what you believe in and not let the bullies grind you diwn,
I’d did wonder if they were doing this to increase costs for the council and hope they’d drop things.
I am a lawyer, but not an expert in Judicial Review. Others may wish to correct, or add to, what I am going to say.
Apologies if you know this already, but it might help to understand something of the process here.
The purpose of Judicial Review is for the courts to have oversight of the procedures of public bodies (or perhaps, bodies exercising a public function). The court will not impose its decision in place of the decision of the public body, but if the court is of the view that the public body has not acted properly in reaching its decision, the court will remit the matter back to the public body (with the public body having been told what it did not do right the first time) and get the public body to take the decision again, but properly.
Reasons for remitting a decision could be things like, the public body did properly consider the evidence before it, it gave undue weight to certain things and ignored others, it did not properly apply the its own rules, and so on.
I assume what has happened here is that a planning decision has gone against your neighbours and they believe that there was a fault with the process/the procedure. From what you say, they have cleared the first hurdle by getting the permission of the judge to bring the Judicial Review proceedings. Next, as I think you know, there will be Judicial Review hearing itself before the High Court. As others have said, this will take time. This will be a contest between your neighbours and the local authority, with your neighbours having to show – on the balance of probabilities – that the local authority’s behavior in reaching its decision (not the decision itself) was at fault.
If the High Court finds in your neighbours’ favour, two things could happen. The local authority could seek to appeal the decision of the High Court to the Court of Appeal. It would need permission (or “leave”) to do this. Second, the local authority could accept the decision of the High Court and the planning authority would have to reconsider the planning application/appeal again afresh.
If the High Court finds against neighbours, your neighbours could seek to appeal the decision of the High Court to the Court of Appeal, again subject to getting “leave”. Alternatively, if your neighbours decide not to appeal, the matter will come to an end and the original decision of the planning authority will stand.
Others may correct me, but I think that all you can do is wait to see how this plays out and, if necessary, be prepared to fight/support the planning application/appeal if it comes back to the planning authority for a second go.
I can’t comment on whether the local authority will throw in the towel. I would imagine that it would be reluctant to do so because it should want to support its planning people if it thinks they acted properly in the first place. As for money and time, your neighbours will need this too and they may decide not (or may not be able) to pursue the matter to the end.
Cheers @pajp,
Aside from the upbeat thought at the start of your last par, you’ve greatly simplified a lot of the confusing stuff I’ve been told/.found out these last few
days.
Going through legal documents is an absolute nightmare for anyone not fluent in
legalese.
@jaygee Thanks … and good luck!
Good luck, J.