Karen Holohan, R (on the application of) v High Speed Two Limited (HS2 Ltd)

Karen Holohan, R (on the application of) v High Speed Two Limited (HS2 Ltd)

The claim disclosed no arguable grounds for judicial review. The Defendant's refusal to grant a lease or allow a survey was rational, based on professional advice and economic considerations, and there was no procedural unfairness or failure to consider relevant factors. The application for permission and interim relief was refused.

Parties
Claimant: Karen Holohan; Claimant: Cormac Holohan; Defendant: High Speed Two Limited (HS2 Ltd); Interested Party: Secretary of State for Transport
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 January 2025
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Application for Permission and Interim Relief
Outcome
Permission to apply for judicial review refused; all applications dismissed.
Legal Topics
Judicial Review, Interim Relief, Listed Buildings, Public Law Procedure, Costs Protection Orders
Administrative Law Property Law Judicial Review Interim Relief Listed Buildings Public Law Procedure Costs Protection Orders

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Karen Holohan

Claimant

Cormac Holohan

Claimant

High Speed Two Limited (HS2 Ltd)

Defendant

Secretary of State for Transport

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Application for Permission and Interim Relief

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the refusal to grant a lease or allow a survey of a listed property was unlawful
  2. 2 Whether the decision-making process was irrational or procedurally unfair
  3. 3 Whether the Defendant failed to consider relevant planning and heritage duties

Ratio Decidendi

The claim disclosed no arguable grounds for judicial review. The Defendant's refusal to grant a lease or allow a survey was rational, based on professional advice and economic considerations, and there was no procedural unfairness or failure to consider relevant factors. The application for permission and interim relief was refused.

Court Disposition

Permission to apply for judicial review refused; all applications dismissed.

Orders

  • Permission to commence judicial review proceedings refused
  • Application for interim relief dismissed