- Explained — Joseph Kyle v Coventry City Council 2023-11-20
“…ildren’s needs; and the review decision dealt with that at length. As Lord Brown made clear in [South Buckinghamshire District Council v Porter [2004] UKHL 33, [2004] 1 WLR 1953], reasons need only address the main issues. In my judgment the reviewing officer was simply not required to explain why [the housing authority] had chosen to …”
- Explained — London Borough of Bromley v Broderick 2020-11-16
“…text of the children’s needs; and the review decision dealt with that at length. As Lord Brown made clear in [South Buckinghamshire DC v Porter [2004] UKHL 33, [2004] 1 WLR 1953], reasons need only address the main issues. In my judgment the reviewing officer was simply not required to explain why [the housing authority] had chosen to …”
- Cited — Bates, R (On the Application Of) v MALDON DISTRICT COUNCIL 2019-07-23
“…ey are drafted for informed parties who are well aware of the issues involved and the arguments advanced (South Bucks DistrictCouncil v Porter) [2004] UKHL 33; [2004] 1 WLR 1953 at [36] per Lord Brown of Eaton-under-Heywood).…”
- Cited — Alibkhiet v London Borough of Brent v City of Westminster 2018-12-06
“…As noted, the reviewing officer has a statutory duty to give reasons for the review decision. In South Bucks DC v Porter (No 2)[2004] UKHL 33, [2004] 1 WLR 1953…”
- Cited — Waterstone Estates Ltd v The Welsh Ministers 2018-07-06
“…r must give intelligible and adequate reasons as to why those issues were determined as they were (South Bucks District Council v Porter (No 2) [2004] UKHL 33; [2004] 1 WLR 1953 at [35]-[36] per Lord Brown of Eaton-under-Heywood, and Bloor Homes at [19(2)]).…”
- Cited — Rother District Council v Freeman-Roach 2018-03-06
“…These and many other cases were reviewed by Lord Brown in South Bucks DC v Porter (No 2) [2004] UKHL 33, [2004] 1 WLR 1953. He confirmed at [29] that the burden is on the challenger to show that the decision maker made an error of law. His well-known summary of principle is at [36]…”
- Cited — Thilakawardhana, R (on the application of) v Office of the Independent Adjudicator for Higher Education & Anor 2018-01-17
“…cific and the degree of particularity required will vary with the nature of the issues arising for decision. In South Bucks DC v Porter (No. 2) [2004] UKHL 33; [2004] 1 WLR 1953, Lord Brown of Eaton-under-Heywood said this, at [36]:…”