Drax Power Ltd, R (On the Application Of) v Secretary of State for Energy And Climate Change

Drax Power Ltd, R (On the Application Of) v Secretary of State for Energy And Climate Change

DECC's decision was not Wednesbury unreasonable. It was reasonably open to DECC to conclude that Drax had failed to demonstrate to its satisfaction that the Key Criterion was met at the Binding Application stage. The decision was not vitiated by procedural unfairness as Drax had sufficient opportunity to clarify its case and no further steps were required of DECC.

Parties
Claimant/respondent: Drax Power Limited; Defendant/appellant: Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
07 August 2014
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Appeal From High Court to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed; application for judicial review dismissed
Legal Topics
Judicial Review, Wednesbury Unreasonableness, Procedural Fairness, Renewable Energy Support Schemes, Investment Contracts, Contracts for Difference, State Aid
Administrative Law Energy Law Public Law Judicial Review Wednesbury Unreasonableness Procedural Fairness Renewable Energy Support Schemes Investment Contracts +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Drax Power Limited

Claimant/respondent

Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Appeal From High Court to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether DECC's decision that Drax did not satisfy the Key Criterion for an Investment Contract was Wednesbury unreasonable
  2. 2 Whether the decision was vitiated by procedural unfairness

Ratio Decidendi

DECC's decision was not Wednesbury unreasonable. It was reasonably open to DECC to conclude that Drax had failed to demonstrate to its satisfaction that the Key Criterion was met at the Binding Application stage. The decision was not vitiated by procedural unfairness as Drax had sufficient opportunity to clarify its case and no further steps were required of DECC.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; application for judicial review dismissed

Orders

  • Set aside the High Court order quashing DECC's decision
  • Set aside the declaration that the Key Criterion was satisfied