Results: 70

• R (TZA) v A Secondary School

  11 Jul 2023 [2023] EWHC 1722 (Admin); [2023] PTSR 2051; [2023] WLR(D) 304, KBD (Judge Thomas Church sitting as a High Court judge)

  04 Mar 2025 [2025] EWCA Civ 200; [2025] PTSR 1503; [2025] WLR(D) 128, CA (Underhill, King, Warby LJJ)

  Subsequent citations: 4.
  EDUCATION — School — Exclusion
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  EDUCATION — School — Exclusion — Child with protected characteristics permanently excluded from school — Whether failure to have “due regard” to public sector equality duty — Whether decision inadequately reasoned and unlawful — Education Act 2002 (c 32), s 51A(1) — Equality Act 2010 (c 15), s 149 — School Discipline (Pupil Exclusions and Reviews) (England) Regulations 2012 (SI 2012/1033)

  EDUCATION — School — Exclusion — Child with protected characteristics permanently excluded from school — Whether failure to have “due regard” to public sector equality duty — Whether decision inadequately reasoned — Education Act 2002 (c 32), s 51A(1) — Equality Act 2010 (c 15), s 149 — School Discipline (Pupil Exclusions and Reviews) (England) Regulations 2012 (SI 2012/1033)

  EDUCATION — School — Exclusion — Child with protected characteristics permanently excluded from school by head teacher — Exclusion upheld by disciplinary committee of governors on reconsideration — Whether public sector equality duty discharged — Whether decision inadequately reasoned — Equality Act 2010 (c 15), s 149

  12 Case(s) considered

  2 Statutes considered

  1 Statutory Instrument considered

• R (Gurajena) v Newham London Borough Council

  05 Jul 2024 [2024] EWHC 1745 (Admin); [2025] PTSR 218; [2024] WLR(D) 318, KBD (Timothy Corner KC sitting as a deputy High Court judge)

  PLANNING — Development — Planning permission
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  PLANNING — Development — Planning permission — Application for planning permission for rear extension to terraced house — Local planning authority sending consultation letters to properties immediately next door to and joined with application property — Objections received but authority granting permission — Whether grant of permission unlawful — Whether requirement to consult owners and occupiers of other properties in terrace — Meaning of “adjoining owner or occupier” — Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015 (SI 2015/595), art 15(5)(10)

  PLANNING — Development — Planning permission — Application for planning permission for rear extension to terraced house — Local planning authority sending consultation letters to neighbouring properties — Objections received but authority granting permission — Whether authority in breach of obligation to consult “adjoining” owners and occupiers — Whether obligation to reconsult where plans for proposed development clarified after consultation — Whether grant of permission unlawful — Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015 (SI 2015/595), art 15(5)(10) — Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (SI 2015/596), Sch 2, Pt 1, para AA.2(3)(a)(i)

  3 Case(s) considered

  2 Statutory Instruments considered

• Cardiff Council v X

  15 Feb 2025 [2025] UKUT 68 (AAC); [2025] PTSR 1468; [2025] WLR(D) 208, UT (Sir Gary Hickinbottom (President of Welsh Tribunals sitting as a judge of the Upper Tribunal))

  EDUCATION — Local education authority — Duty to make special educational provision
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  EDUCATION — Local education authority — Duty to make special educational provision — Child with significant learning difficulties identified as having additional learning needs — Welsh local authority refusing request to name parents’ preferred school in individual development plan — Education Tribunal for Wales allowing parents’ appeal and requiring parents’ preferred school to be named — Proper approach to specifying school in individual development plan — Weight afforded to parental preference — Education Act 1996 (c 56), s 9 — Additional Learning Needs and Education Tribunal (Wales) Act 2018 (anaw 2), s 48

  EDUCATION — Local education authority — Duty to make special educational provision — Child with significant learning difficulties identified as having additional learning needs — Welsh local authority refusing request to name parents’ preferred school in individual development plan — Education Tribunal for Wales allowing parents’ appeal and requiring school to be named — Proper approach to specifying school in individual development plan — Weight to be afforded to parental preference — Education Act 1996 (c 56), s 9, Sch 27, para 3 — Additional Learning Needs and Education Tribunal (Wales) Act 2018 (anaw 2), s 48

  4 Case(s) considered

  2 Statutes considered

• R (Thomas) v Cheltenham Borough Council

  03 May 2024 [2024] EWHC 1035 (Admin); [2024] PTSR 1219; [2024] WLR(D) 215, KBD (Judge Jarman KC sitting as a High Court judge)

  13 Mar 2025 [2025] EWCA Civ 259; [2025] PTSR 1554; [2025] WLR(D) 147, CA (Peter Jackson, Asplin, Andrews LJJ)

  Subsequent citations: 1.
  PLANNING — Development — Permitted development
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  PLANNING — Development — Permitted development — Local authority determining whether prior approval required for erection of electronic communications equipment pursuant to permitted development rights — Objections received expressing concerns about risk to health from potential impact of electromagnetic fields on medical implants — Whether authority erring in law in concluding prior approval not required — Whether certification that development complying with relevant health and safety guidelines obviating need to consider potential impact on medical implants — Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (SI 2015/596), Sch 2, Pt 16, Class A — National Planning Policy Framework (2021), para 118

  PLANNING — Development — Permitted development — Local authority determining whether prior approval required for erection of electronic communications equipment pursuant to permitted development rights — Objections received expressing concerns about risk to health from potential impact of electromagnetic fields on medical implants— Whether authority erring in law in concluding prior approval not required — Whether certification that development complying with relevant health and safety guidelines obviating need to consider potential impact on medical implants — Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (SI 2015/596), Sch 2, Pt 16, Class A — National Planning Policy Framework (2021), para 118

  3 Case(s) considered

  2 Statutory Instruments considered

• AET v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions

  14 Jan 2025 [2025] UKUT 16 (AAC); [2025] PTSR 688; [2025] WLR(D) 91, UT (Upper Tribunal Judge Stout)

  SOCIAL SECURITY — Contributory benefit — Bereavement support payment
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  SOCIAL SECURITY — Contributory benefit — Bereavement support payment — Amendments to legislation extending entitlement to bereavement support payment to persons with dependent children cohabiting with partner at time of partner’s death — Amending order providing for amendments to have retrospective effect — Extent of retrospective effect — Whether affecting outcome of claims made before amending order coming into force — Pensions Act 2014 (c 19), s 30 — Bereavement Benefits (Remedial) Order 2023 (SI 2023/134), arts 1, 3, 4

  SOCIAL SECURITY — Contributory benefit — Bereavement support payment — Amendments to legislation extending entitlement to bereavement support payment to persons with dependent children cohabiting with partner at time of partner’s death — Amending order providing for amendments to have retrospective effect — Extent of retrospective effect — Whether affecting outcome of claims made before amending order coming into force — Pensions Act 2014 (c 19), s 30 — Bereavement Benefits (Remedial) Order 2023 (SI 2023/134), arts 1(2)(3), 3, 4, 6

  2 Case(s) considered

  1 Statute considered

  1 Statutory Instrument considered

• DYKA Plastics NV v Fluvius System Operator CV

  16 Jan 2025 (Case C-424/23); EU:C:2025:15; [2025] PTSR 1112; [2025] WLR(D) 115, ECJ (President of the Court, acting as President of Fourth Chamber K Lenaerts, President of Third Chamber C Lycourgos, Judges S Rodin, D Gratsias, O Spineanu-Matei Advocate General M Campos Sánchez-Bordona)

  Subsequent citations: 1.
  EUROPEAN UNION — Reference for a preliminary ruling — Award of public works contracts

  PUBLIC PROCUREMENT — Contract award procedure — Technical specifications
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  EUROPEAN UNION — Reference for a preliminary ruling — Award of public works contracts — Directive 2014/24/EU — Article 42 — Technical specifications — Formulation — Whether the list at Article 423 is exhaustive in nature — Invitation to tender requiring drainage work to be carried out using pipes made of vitrified clay and made of concrete — Plastic pipes excluded — Article 424 — Reference to a type or to a specific production — Situations in which a reference must be accompanied by the words 'or equivalent'

  PUBLIC PROCUREMENT — Contract award procedure — Technical specifications — Contracting authority publishing public contract notices for replacement of sewers specifying pipes to be made from particular material — Economic operator claiming references to particular material infringing prohibition against discrimination and restriction of competition under EU Directive — Circumstances in which contracting authorities may refer to product’s specific make, source or process in technical specifications for contract — Parliament and Council Directive 2014/24/EU, art 42(2), (3), (4)

  PUBLIC PROCUREMENT — Contract award procedure — Technical specifications — Contracting authority publishing public contract notices for replacement of sewers specifying pipes to be made from particular material — Economic operator claiming references to particular material infringing prohibition against discrimination and restriction of competition under EU Directive — Circumstances in which contracting authorities able to refer to product’s specific make, source or process in technical specifications for contract — Parliament and Council Directive 2014/24/EU, art 42(2)(3)(4)

  1 Case considered

  1 EU Enactment considered

• Marshall v Bath and North East Somerset Council

  11 Oct 2024 [2024] EWHC 2551 (Admin); [2025] PTSR 856; [2024] WLR(D) 466, KBD (Judge Keyser KC sitting as a High Court judge)

  LOCAL GOVERNMENT — Council tax — Student exemption
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  LOCAL GOVERNMENT — Council tax — Student exemption — Student living at family home during term-time at university — Student claiming council tax exemption for another property but local billing authority refusing exemption — Valuation Tribunal dismissing appeal on basis property not student’s “sole or main residence” — Whether tribunal erring in law — Whether test of sole or main residence applicable to exemption for property occupied by students — Whether student entitled to claim exemption — Local Government Finance Act 1992 (c 14) — Council Tax (Exempt Dwellings) Order 1992 (SI 1992/558), art 3, Class N, Class K

  LOCAL GOVERNMENT — Council tax — Student exemption — University student living at family home during term time — Local billing authority refusing student council tax exemption for another property — Valuation Tribunal dismissing appeal on basis property not student’s “sole or main residence” — Whether tribunal erring in law — Whether test of sole or main residence applicable to exemption for property occupied by students — Whether student entitled to claim exemption — Council Tax (Exempt Dwellings) Order 1992 (SI 1992/558), art 3, Class K, Class N

  6 Case(s) considered

  1 Statute considered

  1 Statutory Instrument considered
• Mead Realisations Ltd v Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities (Redrow Homes Ltd v Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities)

  12 Feb 2024 [2024] EWHC 279 (Admin); [2024] PTSR 1093; [2024] WLR(D) 90, KBD (Holgate J)

  30 Jan 2025 [2025] EWCA Civ 32; [2025] PTSR 1158; [2025] WLR(D) 76, CA (Sir Keith Lindblom SPT, Newey, Andrews LJJ)

  Subsequent considerations : 1 positive; 1 negative; most recently considered: 2025. Subsequent citations: 14.
  PLANNING — Development — Flood risk area
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  PLANNING — Development — Flood risk area — Inspector refusing outline planning permission for residential development — Whether inspector erring in application of sequential test in relation to flood risk — Whether Planning Practice Guidance having same legal status as national policy — Whether inspector bound by Planning Practice Guidance — National Planning Policy Framework (2021), paras 11, 162, 166

  PLANNING — Development — Flood risk area — Inspector refusing outline planning permission for residential development — Whether inspector erring in application of sequential test in relation to flood risk — Whether guidance amending national policy — Whether guidance “elucidating” national policy — National Planning Policy Framework (2021), paras 162 — Planning Practice Guidance (2022), para 7-028

  PLANNING — Development — Flood risk area — Inspector refusing outline planning permission for residential development on ground it failed “sequential test” under national planning policy read together with guidance — Whether other sites with lower flood risk “reasonably available” — Whether guidance amending or elucidating national policy — National Planning Policy Framework (2021), para 162 — Planning Practice Guidance (2022), para 7-028

  11 Case(s) considered

  2 Statutory Instruments considered

• Wathen-Fayed v Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government

  20 Jan 2023 [2023] EWHC 92 (Admin); [2023] PTSR 524; [2023] WLR(D) 47, KBD (Timothy Mould KC sitting as a deputy High Court judge)

  10 May 2024 [2024] EWCA Civ 507; [2025] PTSR 302; [2024] WLR(D) 229, CA (Sir Andrew McFarlane P, Andrews, Snowden LJJ)

  08 Oct 2024 Permission to appeal to Supreme Court given, , SC(E)

  30 Jul 2025 [2025] UKSC 32; [2025] PTSR 1568, SC(E) (Lord Reed PSC, Lord Hamblen, Lord Leggatt, Lord Stephens, Lady Simler JJSC)

  Subsequent considerations : most recently considered: 2025. Subsequent citations: 6.
  PLANNING — Development — Planning permission
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  PLANNING — Development — Planning permission — Inspector granting planning permission for new crematorium — Whether erring in approach to legislation concerning location of crematoria — Whether definition of “crematorium” extending to access roads, car parking areas or memorial gardens — Whether inspector wrongly failing to apply sequential test in relation to flood risk — Whether decision irrational — Cremation Act 1902 (2 Edw 7, c 8), ss 2, 5 — National Planning Policy Framework (2021), paras 160, 161, 162

  PLANNING — Development — Planning permission — Inspector granting planning permission for new crematorium — Whether erring in approach to legislation on location of crematoria — Whether definition of “crematorium” extending to all ancillary buildings, infrastructure or memorial gardens — Whether inspector wrongly failing to apply sequential test in relation to flood risk — Whether decision irrational — Cremation Act 1902 (2 Edw 7, c 8), ss 2, 5 — National Planning Policy Framework (2021), paras 159, 160, 161, 162

  PLANNING — Development — Planning permission — Statute prohibiting siting of “crematorium” within 200 yards of dwelling houses and 50 yards of public highways — Whether “crematorium” limited to crematory building — Whether including memorial garden used for storage of ashes — Cremation Act 1902 (2 Edw 7, c 8), ss 2, 5

  7 Case(s) considered

  1 Statute considered

  1 Statutory Instrument considered

• R (KT) v Office of the Independent Adjudicator

  31 Jul 2024 [2024] EWHC 2003 (Admin); [2025] PTSR 458; [2024] WLR(D) 369, KBD (Jonathan Moffett KC sitting as a deputy High Court judge)

  EDUCATION — University — Student complaints scheme
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  EDUCATION — University — Student complaints scheme — Review by independent adjudicator — Student complaining to independent adjudicator of unlawful decision of university’s student disciplinary committee — Independent adjudicator making outcome decision finding complaint partly justified and issuing proposed recommendations for redress — Final recommendations subsequently issued taking account of parties’ representations — Permission granted for judicial review claim by claimant challenging final recommendations — Whether claimant entitled within that claim to challenge lawfulness of earlier outcome decision — Whether such challenge brought out of time — Whether extension of time to be granted — Higher Education Act 2004 (c 8), Sch 2, paras 5, 6, 7 — CPR 54.5(1) — Office of the Independent Adjudicator Scheme Rules, rr 13.1, 14, 15.2

  EDUCATION — University — Student complaints scheme — Review by independent adjudicator — Student complaining to independent adjudicator about decision of university’s student disciplinary committee — Adjudicator making outcome decision finding complaint partly justified — Final recommendations for redress subsequently issued — Permission granted for judicial review claim challenging final recommendations — Whether encompassing challenge to outcome decision — Whether such challenge out of time — Whether extension of time to be granted — Higher Education Act 2004 (c 8), Sch 2, paras 5, 6, 7 — CPR r 54.5(1)

  4 Case(s) considered

  1 Statute considered

  2 Statutory Instruments considered