The grounds included a claim that the Mayor of TH had acted in breach of section 151 of the Greater London Authority Act 1999, which requires the implementation of measures in a Local Implementation Plan (LIP), aimed at securing the objectives in the Mayor of London's Transport Strategy.  TfL actively participated in respect of this ground, arguing that the duty to 'implement' measures was an ongoing one, such that any measures could not be removed unless or until such time that a revised LIP was approved by the Mayor of London.  The Judge rejected the arguments of both the Claimant and TfL for a number of reasons, amongst them the fact that the timetable for 'implementation' within the LIP was not sufficient to render it a legally enforceable duty, and that the duty must be considered in light of the  Council's other statutory duties.  In so finding, the Judge noted that TfL at no stage had raised the possibility that removing the scheme would be a breach of statutory duty in its responses to the consultations. 

The other grounds of challenge included a challenges to the adequacy of the reasons provided; an alleged breach of the 'duty of best value in section 3 of the Local Government Act 1999; the adequacy of consultation; and irrationality. 

The duty is of particular interest in respect of when the duty to re-consult arises in relation to an alternative developed as a result of consultation responses and the relationship between the duty to give reasons and rationality.

Saira Kabir Sheikh KC and Daisy Noble acted for the successful defendant, London Borough of Tower Hamlets.

The case has been reported in the press (for example):

BBC

The Guardian

The Standard

A copy of the judgment is available below.