PETITION FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW BY DAVID BOOTH AND HOLLY PHILP AGAINST THE HIGHLAND COUNCIL [2020] ScotCS CSIH_70 (25 November 2020)

PETITION FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW BY DAVID BOOTH AND HOLLY PHILP AGAINST THE HIGHLAND COUNCIL [2020] ScotCS CSIH_70 (25 November 2020)

The reclaiming motion is incompetent because section 27C(6)(b) of the Court of Session Act 1988 expressly excludes a reclaiming motion where the refusal being challenged is the refusal to grant a request for an oral hearing. The statutory provisions are clear and do not allow for an appeal or reclaiming motion in these circumstances.

Citation
[2020] ScotCS CSIH_70
Parties
Petitioners and Reclaimers: David Booth and Holly Philp; Respondents: The Highland Council
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
25 November 2020
Procedural Posture
Petition for Judicial Review / Reclaiming Motion Against Refusal of Permission to Proceed
Outcome
Reclaiming motion refused as incompetent.
Legal Topics
Competency of Reclaiming Motion, Permission to Proceed in Judicial Review, Time Bar in Judicial Review, Supervisory Jurisdiction, Court of Session Act 1988
Administrative Law Judicial Review Civil Procedure Competency of Reclaiming Motion Permission to Proceed in Judicial Review Time Bar in Judicial Review Supervisory Jurisdiction Court of Session Act 1988

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

David Booth and Holly Philp

Petitioners and Reclaimers

The Highland Council

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Petition for Judicial Review / Reclaiming Motion Against Refusal of Permission to Proceed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a reclaiming motion is competent following refusal of permission to proceed in judicial review after a paper-based review and refusal of a request for oral hearing
  2. 2 Interpretation of section 27C(6) of the Court of Session Act 1988

Ratio Decidendi

The reclaiming motion is incompetent because section 27C(6)(b) of the Court of Session Act 1988 expressly excludes a reclaiming motion where the refusal being challenged is the refusal to grant a request for an oral hearing. The statutory provisions are clear and do not allow for an appeal or reclaiming motion in these circumstances.

Court Disposition

Reclaiming motion refused as incompetent.