R v Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions, ex parte Holding & Barnes plc; Alconbury Developments Ltd; Legal & General Assurance Society Ltd [2001] UKHL 23
The point in plain English: Planning decisions involving policy and public interest do not have to be taken by a court-like independent tribunal. A democratically accountable minister can make them, provided the courts have sufficient power to review the legality of the decision-making process.
What the House of Lords decided
These conjoined cases challenged statutory powers allowing the Secretary of State to determine planning, highways and compulsory-purchase matters. The argument was that this was incompatible with Article 6 because the minister was also responsible for policy.
The House of Lords rejected that argument. Planning involves questions of policy and expediency which Parliament may entrust to elected or politically accountable decision-makers. Article 6 does not require the reviewing court to substitute its own planning merits judgment, provided judicial review is sufficient for the nature of the decision and the legal issues raised.
Why Alconbury matters
Alconbury remains a foundational authority on the relationship between planning decision-makers, the Human Rights Act and judicial review.
See Planning Geek’s guide to judicial review and statutory planning challenges.
Important legal note: Planning Geek is a planning consultancy, not a law firm. This page provides general planning information and is not legal advice. Case law must be read in its factual and legal context and may be affected by later judgments, legislation or policy. Where the original judgment is available, it remains the authoritative source. If the outcome matters to a live case or dispute, take advice from an appropriately qualified planning solicitor or barrister.
Copyright and licensing: Crown copyright and other rights in judgments and source material remain with the relevant rights holders. Where a judgment is reproduced from Find Case Law, it is used under the Open Justice Licence and the source should be acknowledged. Material obtained from other sources is reproduced only where the applicable terms permit it. Planning Geek does not claim copyright in the text of court judgments.