Norfolk County Council v Blanmar 2 LLP (Re Permission to Appeal) [2023] EWHC 2120 (TCC) (17 August 2023)

Norfolk County Council v Blanmar 2 LLP (Re Permission to Appeal) [2023] EWHC 2120 (TCC) (17 August 2023)

Permission to appeal was refused because none of the grounds advanced by the Claimant had a real prospect of success under the civil standard for a first appeal. The court found no compelling reason for appeal, and policy under the Arbitration Act 1996 strongly discourages further appeals. The interpretation of...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2023] EWHC 2120 (TCC)
Parties
Claimant: Norfolk County Council; Defendant: Blanmar 2 LLP
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 August 2023
Procedural Posture
Application for Permission to Appeal Under Arbitration Act 1996 S.67(4) / Post Judgment, Permission to Appeal
Outcome
Application for permission to appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Arbitration Act 1996 S.67, Interpretation of Development Consent Orders (dco), Jurisdiction of Arbitrator, Compulsory Purchase Legislation, Article 46 of DCO
Arbitration Statutory Interpretation Compulsory Purchase Arbitration Act 1996 S.67 Interpretation of Development Consent Orders (dco) Jurisdiction of Arbitrator Compulsory Purchase Legislation Article 46 of DCO

Source-derived case record

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

Norfolk County Council

Claimant

Blanmar 2 LLP

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application for Permission to Appeal Under Arbitration Act 1996 S.67(4) / Post Judgment, Permission to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether permission to appeal should be granted under s.67(4) Arbitration Act 1996
  2. 2 Correct test for granting permission to appeal under s.67(4)
  3. 3 Interpretation of Article 46 of the DCO

Ratio Decidendi

Permission to appeal was refused because none of the grounds advanced by the Claimant had a real prospect of success under the civil standard for a first appeal. The court found no compelling reason for appeal, and policy under the Arbitration Act 1996 strongly discourages further appeals. The interpretation of Article 46 of the DCO was not shown to be erroneous, and the dispute was properly characterised as arising under the provisions of the DCO.

Court Disposition

Application for permission to appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Permission to appeal refused
  • No further orders made