- Cited — Edward Blacker, R (on the application of) v Chelmsford City Council 2023-01-17
“…fect until it has been notified to the applicant, and not on a resolution to grant or refuse: see R (Burkett) v Hammersmith & Fulham LBC (No 1) [2002] UKHL 23, [2002] 1 WLR 1593. This means that it was open to the Planning Committee to change its mind at any time prior to the notification of its decision to the applicant’s representati…”
- Applied — M Sport Ltd, R (On the Application Of) v Her Majesty's Revenue And Customs 2021-04-16
“… not applied unthinkingly, and in a suitable context the courts are willing to adopt a flexible and pragmatic approach, as exemplified in cases such as Burkett [2002] 1 WLR 1593. Where Parliament has provided a potential alternative remedy, such as that in section 222, the court will if necessary ensure that the taxpayer is not prejudi…”
- Considered — The Secretary of State for Transport v Arriva Rail East Midlands Ltd ("Arriva") 2019-12-18
“… in which, at least theoretically, more than one decision may fall to be challenged? This was considered by the House of Lords in R (Burkett) v Hammersmith LBC [2002] 1 WLR 1593. In that case, the local planning authority resolved on 15 September 1999 that outline planning permission should be granted, despite the fact that the environ…”
- Cited — Archer, R (on the application of) v HM Revenue and Customs 2019-06-18
“…nditions precedent, which had been satisfied by the date when actual permission was granted? In R (Burkett) v Hammersmith London BoroughCouncil [2002] UKHL 23, [2002] 1 WLR 1593, the House of Lords decided that time did not begin to run until the latter date. This did not mean, however, that the court would lack jurisdiction to enterta…”