Tunbridge Wells Borough Council
2017
6 December
TWBC Full Council Meeting.
DECISION: That Full Council endorse the Civic Centre project designed to RIBA Stage 3 (Developed Design) in accordance with Full Council Decision FC70/16 on 22 February 2017 and it be approved for funding and delivery.
(Comments below.)
2018
9 May
TWBC Planning Committee: Application Reference 18/0076/FULL, Civic Development Site.
B.C.Ransley spoke at this meeting to warn that as the proposal locks Council Tax payers into certain additional payments and obligations, under the terms of the Equality Act 2010 each Council Tax payer must be consulted over the speculative obligations being underwritten.
The planning application makes no reference to the Equality Act 2010 or Human Rights compatibility matrix and is therefore unlawful.
The Planning Committee ignored the warning and approved the application.
15 June
TWBC Planning Decision Notice.
TWBC issued Planning Decision Notice as above for Planning Application Reference 18/0076/FULL.
19 June
Judicial Review Claim Form filed by B.C.Ransley in the High Court of Justice Administrative Court.
Reference CO/2417/2018, issued by the Administrative Court.
1st Defendant: Tunbridge Wells Borough Council.
2nd defendant: Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, the Rt Hon James Brokenshire MP.
3rd defendant: TWBC Auditors, Grant Thornton UK LLP.
Defendants 4-51: the 48 individual Members of Tunbridge Wells Borough Council.
11 July
Acknowledgement of Service Form and witness statement of Tunbridge Wells Borough Council employee David Candlin received from solicitors Sharpe Pritchard.
(Comments below.)
2 August
In the High Court of Justice Queen's Bench Division Planning Court.
David Elvin QC, sitting as a Deputy Judge of the High Court, ordered that permission for the application for Judicial Review be refused and costs awarded against the claimant.
(Comments below.)
2017
6 December
TWBC Full Council Meeting.
No evidence that the requirements of the Human Rights Act (1998) or Equality Act (2010) taken into account insofar as the effects that the project might have on disadvantaged groups.
2018
11 July
Acknowledgement of Service Form and witness statement of Tunbridge Wells Borough Council employee David Candlin received from solicitors Sharpe Pritchard.
The witness statement sought to distance the Planning Committee from the Council, claiming in effect that the Planning Committee was an entirely separate entity from the Council.
Contrary to the judgement handed down by Mr Justice Lewis on 20 June 2018 in relation to the very similar case brought against Bath & NE Somerset Council, the statement claimed the application was "totally without merit" and asked the Court to "refuse permission".
The statement made no reference or acknowledgement to the necessity to take into account the provisions of the Equality Act 2010 or Human Rights compatibility matrix as per the 1998 Act and as such was not a defence to the claim.
2 August
In the High Court of Justice Queen's Bench Division Planning Court.
Elvin asserted that the Planning Committee was separate to the Council, (and implied it was not required to take into account the provisions of the relevant Acts), in spite of the judgement handed down on 20 June 2018 by Mr Justice Lewis.
Elvin made no reference to the substantive claim that Tunbridge Wells Borough Council had failed to take into account the provisions of the Equality Act 2010 or Human Rights Act 1998.
Bath & NE Somerset Council
A similar case, involving Bath & North-East Somerset Council, was decided in June 2018 (reference CO/162/2018).
2018
17/18 April
High Court Hearing at Bristol Civil Court
Foxhill Estates Residents Association challenge Bath & NE Somerset Council's granting of planning permission, (Planning Application Reference 17/04392/NMA), for the demolition of 542 dwellings.
The grounds were that the council failed to have due regard to the public sector equality duty, as required by section 149 of the Equality Act 2010.
20 June
High Court Judgement in the Foxhill Estates Residents Association challenge of Bath & NE Somerset Council's granting of planning permission.
Mr Justice Lewis upheld the challenge, concluding that the granting of outline planning permission was unlawful and should be quashed.
In particular, as a matter of statutory language, the duty in section 149 of the 2010 did apply to the function of granting outline planning permission pursuant to section 70 of the Town & Country Planning Act 1990.
Furthermore, the council did not in fact have due regard to the impact on the elderly and disabled persons in the granting of the application.