“It's hard to quantify, right now. But at a guess, I'd say it's probably more than 50% faster, at times. It's literally that quick. We've found to be an essential practical tool. We're very satisfied.”
Walsall CouncilAccess all documents on Obiter dictum
Northumbrian Water Ltd, R v Water Services Regulation Authority [2024] EWCA Civ 842 Background to the decision As set out in the News Analysis: Northumbrian Water—No duty of prescription under the common law? (R (on the application of Northumbrian Water Ltd) v Water Services Regulation Authority), the decision confirms that where a public authority enjoys a discretionary power, it is under no requirement to publish a policy explaining the manner in which that discretion will be exercised. Accordingly, any general requirement to codify how such powers are to be applied was rejected. This conclusion displaces the stance adopted in ZLL v Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government [2022] EWHC 85 (Admin) or, more precisely, treats the dictum on a ‘duty of prescription’ as obiter. While the implications of that point are examined in the article referenced, a few preliminary observations may assist what follows. First, the main source of support for recognising any such duty has been the Supreme Court decision in Lumba v SSHD...