Cotham School, R (On the Application Of) v Bristol City Council

Cotham School, R (On the Application Of) v Bristol City Council

The committee acted unlawfully by failing to properly analyse and give reasons for departing from the Inspector's findings regarding the sufficiency and effect of signage on the land, which was central to determining whether use was 'as of right' for the requisite period under section 15 of the Commons Act 2006.

Parties
Claimant: Cotham School; Defendant: Bristol City Council; First Interested Party: David Mayer; Second Interested Party: Bristol University; Third Interested Party: Rockleaze Rangers Football Club
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
03 May 2018
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Judgment After Substantive Hearing
Outcome
Claimant succeeds on grounds 1 and 3; decision of the committee found unlawful; relief to be determined after further submissions or agreement.
Legal Topics
Commons Registration, Town and Village Greens, Judicial Review, Statutory Interpretation, Procedural Fairness
Administrative Law Land Law Local Government Law Commons Registration Town and Village Greens Judicial Review Statutory Interpretation Procedural Fairness

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 20 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Cotham School

Claimant

Bristol City Council

Defendant

David Mayer

First Interested Party

Bristol University

Second Interested Party

Rockleaze Rangers Football Club

Third Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Judgment After Substantive Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the use of land by local inhabitants was 'as of right' for the purposes of section 15 of the Commons Act 2006
  2. 2 Whether the registration authority failed to provide adequate reasons for its decision
  3. 3 Whether irrelevant matters were taken into account or there was procedural unfairness

Ratio Decidendi

The committee acted unlawfully by failing to properly analyse and give reasons for departing from the Inspector's findings regarding the sufficiency and effect of signage on the land, which was central to determining whether use was 'as of right' for the requisite period under section 15 of the Commons Act 2006.

Court Disposition

Claimant succeeds on grounds 1 and 3; decision of the committee found unlawful; relief to be determined after further submissions or agreement.