Skip to main content
CLOSE

Charities

Close

Corporate and Commercial

Close

Employment and Immigration

Close

Fraud and Investigations

Close

Individuals

Close

Litigation

Close

Planning, Infrastructure and Regeneration

Close

Public Law

Close

Real Estate

Close

Restructuring and Insolvency

Close

Energy

Close

Entrepreneurs

Close

Private Wealth

Close

Real Estate

Close

Tech and Innovation

Close

Transport and Infrastructure

Close
Home / News and Insights / Insights / R (on the application of Goring-on-Thames Parish Council) v South Oxfordshire District Council & Goring & Streatley Community Energy Ltd (2018)

Why is it important?

Deals with s.31 Senior Courts Act 1981 (application for judicial review) and the duty in s.31(2A) where the High Court must refuse to grant relief, on an application for judicial review. s.31(2A) bites when it is highly likely that the outcome for the applicant would not have been substantially different if the conduct complained of had not occurred.

What happened?

Goring-on-Thames Parish Council (GTPC) applied to re-open a decision refusing permission to appeal against South Oxfordshire District Council’s grant of planning permission to Goring & Streatley Community Energy Ltd for the development of hydroelectric turbines.

Pursuant to s.31(2A), the High Court judge refused to grant relief and held that, although the local authority failed to comply with its duty to pay special attention to the desirability of preserving the character of a conservation area, it was highly likely that the outcome would not have been substantially different if this failure had not occurred.

GTPC’s application for permission to appeal was considered on the papers by a Court of Appeal judge and refused. GTPC argued that the permission decision had failed to deal with its main ground of appeal, that the High Court judge erred in applying the s.31(2A) duty and that s.31(2A) was not applicable where the conduct complained of constituted a substantial error of law rather than a minor procedural technicality.

What did the court say?

The Court of Appeal said that ‘conduct’ in s.31(2A) is not limited to procedural conduct. It includes substantive decision-making across the whole spectrum of administrative action, and the procedural steps taken in the course of decision-making.

Take away

‘Conduct’ under s.31(2A), includes substantive errors of law.

Related Articles

Our Offices

London
One Bartholomew Close
London
EC1A 7BL

Cambridge
50/60 Station Road
Cambridge
CB1 2JH

Reading
The Anchorage, 34 Bridge Street
Reading RG1 2LU

Southampton
4 Grosvenor Square
Southampton SO15 2BE

 

Reading
The Anchorage, 34 Bridge Street
Reading RG1 2LU

Southampton
4 Grosvenor Square
Southampton SO15 2BE

  • Lexcel
  • CYBER ESSENTIALS PLUS

© BDB Pitmans 2024. One Bartholomew Close, London EC1A 7BL - T +44 (0)345 222 9222

Our Services

Charities chevron
Corporate and Commercial chevron
Employment and Immigration chevron
Fraud and Investigations chevron
Individuals chevron
Litigation chevron
Planning, Infrastructure and Regeneration chevron
Public Law chevron
Real Estate chevron
Restructuring and Insolvency chevron

Sectors and Groups

Private Wealth chevron
Real Estate chevron
Transport and Infrastructure chevron