header-logo header-logo

23 October 2008
Issue: 7342 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Planning/Judicial Review

R (on the application of Finn- Kelcey) v Milton Keynes Council [2008] EWCA Civ 1067, [2008] All ER (D) 94 (Oct)

Given that the CPR expressly provide for a three-month time limit for judicial review, the courts cannot adopt a policy that, in challenges to the grant of a planning permission, a time limit of six weeks will in practice apply.

However, the fact Parliament has prescribed a six-week’s time limit in cases where the permission is granted by the secretary of state rather than by a local planning authority, is not wholly irrelevant to the decision as to what is “prompt” in an individual case.

The obligation to comply with the pre-action protocol does not remove the obligation to bring the claim promptly (a letter is no substitute for the lodging of a claim form). Even if the claim has not been lodged “promptly”, there may be considerations which mean that it is in the public interest that the claim should be allowed to proceed, despite the delay and the absence of any explanation for that delay, eg if there is a strong case for saying that the permission was ultra vires.

Issue: 7342 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

Daniel Burbeary, office managing partner of Michelman Robinson, discusses launching in London, the power of the law, and what the kitchen can teach us about litigating

Wedlake Bell—Rebecca Christie

Wedlake Bell—Rebecca Christie

Firm welcomes partner with specialist expertise in family and art law

Birketts—Álvaro Aznar

Birketts—Álvaro Aznar

Dual-qualified partner joins international private client team

NEWS
A seemingly dry procedural update may prove potent. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ this week, Stephen Gold explains that new CPR 31.12A—part of the 193rd update—fills a ‘lacuna’ exposed in McLaren Indy v Alpa Racing
The long-running Mazur saga edged towards its finale as the Court of Appeal heard arguments on whether non-solicitors can ‘conduct litigation’. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School reports from a packed courtroom where 16 wigs watched Nick Bacon KC argue that Mr Justice Sheldon had failed to distinguish between ‘tasks and responsibilities’

The Court of Appeal has slammed the brakes on claimants trying to swap defendants after limitation has expired. In Adcamp LLP v Office Properties and BDB Pitmans v Lee [2026] EWCA Civ 50, it overturned High Court rulings that had allowed substitutions under s 35(6)(b) of the Limitation Act 1980, reports Sarah Crowther of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ

Cheating in driving tests is surging—and courts are responding firmly. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort Law School charts a rise in impersonation and tech-assisted fraud, with 2,844 attempts recorded in a year
As AI-generated ‘deepfake’ images proliferate, the law may already have the tools to respond. In NLJ this week, Jon Belcher of Excello Law argues that such images amount to personal data processing under UK GDPR
back-to-top-scroll