R v Avon County Council, ex parte Terry Adams Ltd
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 23 June 1993 |
| Date | 23 June 1993 |
| Court | Queen's Bench Division |
Queen's Bench Division
Before Mr Justice Jowitt
Local authority - waste disposal company - contracts - discrimination against other contractors
Where a local authority, acting as a waste disposal authority, was setting up a waste disposal company, it was not under a duty to consider the interests of other waste disposal contractors or the question of discrimination.
Mr Justice Jowitt so observed in a reserved judgment in the Queen's Bench Division when dismissing on the ground of lack of locus standi an application for judicial review by a competing waste disposal contractor, Terry Adams Ltd, against the decision of Avon County Council (Avon) on February 16, 1993 to award to Avon Waste Management Ltd (AWM) five contracts for the disposal of waste material, the applicant having tendered for one of those contracts.
Pursuant to section 51(1) of the Environmental Protection Act 1990, Avon, having negotiated with Wessex Waste Management Ltd, made arrangements in accordance with Part II of Schedule 2 to the Act to set up its own waste disposal company, AWM, to compete for the waste disposal contracts.
Section 51 of the 1990 Act provides: "(1) It shall be the duty of each waste disposal authority to arrange (a) for the disposal of the controlled waste collected in its area by the waste collection authorities; … by means of arrangements made (in accordance with Part II of Schedule 2 to this Act) with waste disposal contractors, but by no other means."
Mr Robert Carnwath QC, and Mr Richard Gordon for Terry Adams; Mr James Goudie, QC, and Mr Peter Oldham for Avon; Mr Mark Shaw for Wessex Waste Management Ltd.
MR JUSTICE JOWITT said that Avon's actions were in performance of the duties imposed upon it by Part 2 of the Environmental Protection Act 1990.
Whereas a waste disposal authority might form a company other than on the direction of the secretary of state and vest assets in it, the company which was formed on his direction pursuant to section 32(2) of the 1990 Act was only to be at arm's length once vesting date arrived. It did not have to be an arm's length company before its assets became vested in it and while negotiations might be in hand for the transfer of assets.
Proposed transfer of assets
At the setting up and endowment stage of a company formed in accordance with Schedule 2 to the 1990 Act there was no duty upon the authority to consider the...
To continue reading
Request your trial