moved Amendment No. 98:
98: Clause 13, page 6, line 31, leave out ““6”” and insert ““12””
The noble Lord said: This is a large group but the amendments are relatively small and we can deal with them simply and, I hope, fairly expeditiously. The amendments are designed to extend the period in which a claim for judicial review can be brought. It is a similar argument to that on 28 days and 42 days. We are suggesting that we move from 48 days to 98 days, or 12 weeks. Sometimes legal issues can be difficult. At this stage, the decision on whether to bring a judicial review, if it is to be brought at all—the probability is that it will not be—is something for which we ought to allow time.
Other amendments in the group would ensure that the time limit ran from the date of publication rather than the date of the Secretary of State’s decision. If the Secretary of State reaches a decision on a Friday afternoon, the publication of that decision may well not be until Monday. Although three days may seem insignificant, my experience suggests that lawyers could argue about three days for three weeks or even three months. The date of publication ought to be the appropriate point at which to start the clock. These are fairly simple amendments and I beg to move.
Planning Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Dixon-Smith
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 14 October 2008.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Planning Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
704 c680-1 Session
2007-08Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 22:57:06 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_499743
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_499743
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_499743