Bett Properties & Anor v Scottish Ministers & Ors, Re Application For Judicial Review [2000] ScotCS 246 (6 September 2000)

Bett Properties & Anor v Scottish Ministers & Ors, Re Application For Judicial Review [2000] ScotCS 246 (6 September 2000)

The petition was held competent as judicial review procedure allows for flexible adjustment of remedies. There was no unreasonable delay or acquiescence barring the petition. The petitioners' title and interest to sue depended on whether the Council's decision was unreasonable and prejudiced their pending appeal; this was reserved for determination with the merits. The Council's decision could only be challenged if it was shown to be one no reasonable authority would have made, and if it prejudiced the petitioners' right to a fair appeal process.

Citation
[2000] ScotCS 246
Parties
Petitioner: Bett Properties; Petitioner: The Scottish Metropolitan Property PLC; First Respondent: The Scottish Ministers; Second Respondent: Dundee City Council; Third Respondent: Sainsbury's Supermarkets Limited; Fourth Respondent: Scottish Enterprise Tayside
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
06 September 2000
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / First Hearing on Competency, Delay, Title and Interest, and Merits
Outcome
Pleas to competency and delay repelled; decision on title, interest, and merits reserved.
Legal Topics
Judicial Review of Planning Decisions, Competency of Petitions, Delay and Acquiescence in Judicial Review, Title and Interest to Sue in Planning Matters, Unreasonableness in Administrative Decisions
Administrative Law Planning Law Judicial Review of Planning Decisions Competency of Petitions Delay and Acquiescence in Judicial Review Title and Interest to Sue in Planning Matters Unreasonableness in Administrative Decisions

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 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bett Properties

Petitioner

The Scottish Metropolitan Property PLC

Petitioner

The Scottish Ministers

First Respondent

Dundee City Council

Second Respondent

Sainsbury's Supermarkets Limited

Third Respondent

Scottish Enterprise Tayside

Fourth Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / First Hearing on Competency, Delay, Title and Interest, and Merits

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the petition as adjusted was competent
  2. 2 Whether delay barred the petition (mora, taciturnity, acquiescence)
  3. 3 Whether petitioners had title and interest to challenge the Council's decision

Ratio Decidendi

The petition was held competent as judicial review procedure allows for flexible adjustment of remedies. There was no unreasonable delay or acquiescence barring the petition. The petitioners' title and interest to sue depended on whether the Council's decision was unreasonable and prejudiced their pending appeal; this was reserved for determination with the merits. The Council's decision could only be challenged if it was shown to be one no reasonable authority would have made, and if it prejudiced the petitioners' right to a fair appeal process.

Court Disposition

Pleas to competency and delay repelled; decision on title, interest, and merits reserved.

Orders

  • Sainsbury's first and third pleas-in-law repelled
  • Decision on petitioners' title, interest, and merits reserved for further consideration