The Queen (on the application of Bank Renewables Ltd) v The Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judge | Mr Justice Garnham |
| Judgment Date | 13 March 2020 |
| Neutral Citation | [2020] EWHC 606 (Admin) |
| Docket Number | No. CO/3017/2019 |
| Court | Queen's Bench Division (Administrative Court) |
| Date | 13 March 2020 |
[2020] EWHC 606 (Admin)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION
ADMINISTRATIVE COURT
Royal Courts of Justice
Mrs Justice Garnham
No. CO/3017/2019
and
Mr A. O'Neil QC and Mr N. Gibson (instructed by Brodies Solicitors) appeared on behalf of the Claimant.
Mr G. Facenna QC and Mr C. McCarthy and Ms C. Hunt (instructed by Government legal department) appeared on behalf of the Defendant.
Mr K. Beal QC and Mr J. Pobjoy (instructed by Linklaters LLP) appeared on behalf of the Interested Parties
I heard argument in these judicial review proceedings on 3 rd and 4 th of this month. Those were rolled up hearings, listed in that way because the matter was said to be urgent. At the conclusion of the argument I reserved judgment, indicating that, given the urgency of the case, I would produce a judgment as soon as I was able.
At about 5 p.m. on 9 March I had completed the first full draft of the judgment, and made to send it to my clerk by email for proof reading. At precisely that moment. I received an email from my clerk forwarding an email from the claimant's solicitors indicating that discussions were taking place between the parties which might result in the discontinuance of the claim and suggesting I should not start or continue work on the judgment.
I indicated in the following days, in communication between my clerk and the parties, that this being a public law and not a private law case, I was minded, nonetheless, to hand down judgment. I was told by the parties that that might compromise the proposed settlement. As a result, I indicated that I would not circulate the draft judgment, nor hand down the final judgment, until I had given the parties the chance to make representations. I have now received written submissions on that issue, and this morning have received oral submissions.
There was some suggestion that I should hear these submissions in private session. I indicated that I would not deal with this other than in open, public session except to the extent that they concerned matters of particular commercial sensitivity. As it has turned out, the arguments have been conducted without any need for me to go into private session.
It is common ground that I have a wide discretion in these circumstances whether or not to hand down judgment (see Barclays Bank v Nylon Capital [2011] EWCA Civ 826). Unlike the case in Barclays, and unlike most of the other cases to which I have been referred, these proceedings are public law proceedings. The claimant seeks permission to challenge the decision of the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, dated 1 May 2019, to allow electrical operators using offshore or remote island wind to apply for UK State support for renewable energy generation, whilst...
To continue reading
Request your trial