Unincorporated associations are traditionally viewed as having no independent legal personality and are thus precluded from bringing proceedings. However, a guideline High Court ruling heralds a more flexible approach, at least in the field of planning.
A neighbourhood forum launched a challenge under Section 113 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 (the Act) to a local planning policy document which would govern land use in its area for years to come. The local authority responded that, as an unincorporated association, the forum could not be viewed as a ‘person aggrieved’ within the meaning of the Act and thus had no legal standing to bring the claim.
In rejecting that argument, however, the Court found that the forum was more than a mere busy-body and had a sufficient interest in the policy document concerned to justify its pursuit of the case. Public policy considerations were in favour of informal groups of objectors having a free-standing right to bring challenges both under the Act and by way of judicial review.
The forum’s purpose was to ensure good planning practices in its area; it had its own written constitution, bank account, a steering group and an identifiable membership. Its five-year designation as a neighbourhood forum under Section 61F of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 had expired, but that did not affect its standing to bring the claim.
The Court noted that the impact of planning decisions commonly falls most heavily on local residents who often group informally together to make representations or attend inquiries. It would be unfortunate if the law prevented such groups from challenging in court decisions in which they had participated. The Court’s ruling opened the way for the forum to pursue its case to a full hearing.
Aireborough Neighbourhood Development Forum v Leeds City Council. Case Number: CO/3279/2019