Eco-Energy (GB) Ltd v First Secretary of State [2004] EWCA Civ 1566

Court of Appeal

Facts: Eco-Energy was a member of a consortium formed to develop land for coal extraction. A consortium member (C) obtained options over the land, and the consortium applied for planning permission, which was subsequently refused. Although C orally transferred the benefits and burdens of the options to Eco-Energy, this transfer was not legally effective under the Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1989 s.2. On appeal, Eco-Energy argued that it had an equitable interest in the land and that C should be substituted as the claimant under the Civil Procedure Rules 1998 Part 19 r.19.

Held: The Court found that Eco-Energy was not a "person aggrieved" under s.288 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. The Court held that Eco-Energy had not taken a sufficiently active role in the planning process and did not hold a relevant legal interest in the land. C's failure to legally transfer the option did not confer standing upon Eco-Energy. The Court determined that C could not be substituted for Eco-Energy as s.288 did not fall within the scope of r.19.5 of the Civil Procedure Rules. Additionally, s.288 did not have a limitation period under the Limitation Act 1980, emphasizing that planning applications must be decided promptly, and affected parties must be clearly identifiable.

Key Judicial Statement: Lord Justice Peter Gibson noted, "The statutory requirement for the determination of planning applications as soon as possible is undermined if parties can be substituted post-decision in ways not envisaged by Parliament."