Conclusions
Conclusion
The contractual context of this claim means that judicial review is limited to a claim on the grounds of fraud, corruption or bad faith, none of which applies here. Even if that is wrong, the claim fails on the merits as none of the grounds for seeking judicial review are made out for the reasons set out above.
The claim for judicial review is dismissed.
In the circumstances, it is unnecessary to go on to consider the final issue in the agreed List of Issues which is whether s.31(2A) of the Supreme Court Act 1981 applies.
I am grateful to all Counsel and their legal teams for the helpful and concise way in which this matter was presented. I am particularly grateful to junior Counsel on both sides for their assistance in finalising the judgment for handing down.
- Heading
- Introduction
- Background
- Background to the contract between Rydon and the SoS (“ the Contract ”)
- Building Safety Act 2022 and RAS Regulations
- Relevant contractual provisions
- Rydon enters into Contract and joins RAS
- The process leading to the Decisions
- Since the decisions
- Agreed List of Issues
- Amenability to and Scope of Judicial Review
- Amenability - Discussion
- Ground 1 – Breach of Natural Justice
- Ground 1 – Discussion
- Ground 2 – Breach of Tameside duty
- Ground 2 - Submissions
- Ground 2 - Discussion
- Ground 3 – Failure to take account of Material Considerations
- Ground 3 - Discussion
- Grounds 4 & 5 – Predetermination / Improper Motive
- Ground 6 – Wednesbury irrationality / Failure to provide reasons
- Conclusions
![AC-2024-LON-0001595 - [2025] EWHC 2182 (Admin)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_fi51A75.png)