Powell, R (on the application of) v The Brighton Marina Company Ltd & Ors [2014] EWHC 2136 (Admin) (27 June 2014)
The Brighton Marina Act 1968 provides a continuing power to extend, enlarge, alter, replace or relay the original works after their completion, and Section 40 permits development on any part of works 1-9 inclusive. The works in question fall within these statutory powers. There is no inconsistency between the BMA and the Marine and Coastal Access Act 2009. The claim was not brought promptly, and significant prejudice would result if relief were granted.
- Citation
- [2014] EWHC 2136 (Admin)
- Parties
- Claimant: Robert Powell; First Defendant: The Brighton Marina Company Limited; Second Defendant: West Quay Development Company Partnership LLP; Third Defendant: The Marine Management Organisation; Interested Party: Brighton and Hove City Council
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 27 June 2014
- Procedural Posture
- Judicial Review / Judgment After Rolled Up Hearing
- Outcome
- Claim dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Statutory Interpretation, Local Acts, Marine Licensing, Delay in Judicial Review, Development Consent
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Robert Powell
Claimant
The Brighton Marina Company Limited
First Defendant
West Quay Development Company Partnership LLP
Second Defendant
The Marine Management Organisation
Third Defendant
Brighton and Hove City Council
Interested Party
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Judgment After Rolled Up Hearing
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether phase 1 of the development is authorised by Section 5(2) of the Brighton Marina Act 1968
- 2 Whether the powers under Section 5(2) are subject to the time limit in Section 23
- 3 Whether Section 40 of the BMA is an exhaustive statement of development powers
Ratio Decidendi
The Brighton Marina Act 1968 provides a continuing power to extend, enlarge, alter, replace or relay the original works after their completion, and Section 40 permits development on any part of works 1-9 inclusive. The works in question fall within these statutory powers. There is no inconsistency between the BMA and the Marine and Coastal Access Act 2009. The claim was not brought promptly, and significant prejudice would result if relief were granted.
Court Disposition
Claim dismissed
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment