R (Alconbury Developments Ltd) v Secretary of State for the Environment [2001] 2 WLR 1389

Court: House of Lords

Facts: In this case, the Secretary of State (S of S) made decisions regarding various planning permission applications under different statutory powers. In three cases heard together, challenges for judicial review (JR) were brought against these decisions, questioning whether the S of S's decision-making power was compatible with Article 6(1) of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), which guarantees the right to have civil rights and obligations determined by an independent and impartial tribunal. Issue:Were the decisions made by the Secretary of State compatible with Article 6(1) of the ECHR?

Held: The House of Lords allowed the appeal, concluding that the Secretary of State had not acted unlawfully. There was no violation of Article 6(1) of the ECHR as set out in Part 1 of Schedule 1 to the Human Rights Act 1998.

Key Judicial Statements: Lord Slynn argued that proportionality should be adopted as a free-standing standard of review in common law, extending beyond the application of the Human Rights Act 1998.

💡 LevelUpLaw: This case highlights the interpretation of the Human Rights Act 1998 in relation to planning decisions and the principles of administrative law. It underscores the importance of maintaining an independent and impartial decision-making process while also suggesting that proportionality could serve as a significant standard of review in common law contexts, reflecting an evolving understanding of rights and administrative fairness.