European Convention on Human Rights

• Article 6(1): ‘In the determination of his civil rights and obligations or of any criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law.’
• See pp 166-7 for discussion of which decisions determine civil rights and obligations. And bear in mind that an administrative decision made by an authority that is not independent may not contravene Art 6, if there is review by a court with ‘full jurisdiction’ (that is, with jurisdiction that is sufficient to make the whole process fair in spite of the fact that the initial decision maker was not independent; see p 169).

Localism Act 2011

• Section 25 pro­vides that ‘A decision-maker is not to be taken to have had, or to have appeared to have had, a closed mind when making the decision just because . . . the decision-maker had previously done anything that directly or indirectly indicated what view the decision-maker took, or would or might take’ in relation to a relevant matter.
• This provision found its way into the Localism Act because of a particular problem: challenges to local authority planning decisions, based on the allegation that the local authority was biased because council members had a political agenda that was in favour of or adverse to a proposal for property development.  The provision should not have been necessary, as it is not in itself unfair for a public authority to decide a matter on which the authority already had a provisional view. See discussion at p 191.