Group for Action on Leeds Bradford Airport, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for Transport

Venue in judicial review proceedings should be determined by the claim’s closest connection and the overriding objective. Where substantially similar issues are being considered in another claim filed first, avoiding duplication and enabling one judge to manage the related proceedings may provide a good reason to resist transfer, including where both parties oppose transfer. Arguments based only on national importance, the location of lawyers and parties, or travel costs will not ordinarily outweigh a strong regional connection with the subject matter and claimant.

This was a paper determination concerning venue. A minded to transfer order proposed transferring a judicial review claim from London to Leeds. Both parties opposed transfer because the claim raised issues sufficiently similar to another claim, identified by case number CO/3830/2022, which had apparently been filed first and which they wished the same court to manage. The court considered whether the related proceedings and the parties’ other venue arguments justified retaining the claim in London.

1. Transfer declined. The court declined to transfer the claim to Leeds.
2. The parties’ shared opposition to transfer was based on the substantial similarity between the issues in this claim and those in CO/3830/2022. Although the point had not been raised in Form N461 and might have avoided the minded to transfer order, it was a good reason to retain the claim in London.
3. Duplication of the same or similar issues in different venues is capable of undermining the overriding objective. The judge dealing with the apparently earlier-filed claim should have full visibility of both proceedings, including case-management matters and any issue as to venue.
4. The court rejected, as standalone grounds, the arguments that London was appropriate because the claim concerned an issue of national importance, the defendant and lawyers were based there, or transfer would create travel costs. The individual claimant lived in Leeds, and the claimant group’s stated purpose concerned preventing expansion of Leeds Bradford Airport. Those circumstances gave the claim a strong connection with the Leeds region, notwithstanding the national character of the Jet Zero Strategy.

This was a first-instance judicial determination on venue. A minded to transfer order had been issued on 24 October 2022, but the court declined the proposed transfer to Leeds.