header-logo header-logo

11 December 2008 / Nicholas Dobson
Issue: 7349 / Categories: Features , Local government , Public
printer mail-detail

Bad behaviour

Injunction or ASBO? A council’s dilemma, by Nicholas Dobson

Before the advent of s 222 of the Local Government Act 1972 (LGA 1972),
local authorities were not considered competent to bring public interest proceedings in their own name. This was despite s 276 of the Local Government Act 1933 (LGA 1933), which provided that: “Where a local authority deem it expedient for the promotion or protection of the interests of the inhabitants of their area, they may prosecute or defend any legal proceedings.”

Case law authority (latterly Prestatyn UDC v Prestatyn Raceway Ltd [1969] 3 All ER 1573) held that the terms of s 276 were not sufficiently explicit to enable a local authority to bring proceedings in its own name. At common law, what was expected in these circumstances was that the attorney general would institute proceedings to uphold public rights and duties either acting ex officio or through a “relator action”, ie one in which the attorney general proceeded to assert a public right on the relation of a private person or a

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Bellevue Law—Lianne Craig

Bellevue Law—Lianne Craig

Workplace law firm expands commercial disputes team with senior consultant hire

EIP—Rob Barker

EIP—Rob Barker

IP firm promotes patent attorney to partner

Muckle LLP—Ryan Butler

Muckle LLP—Ryan Butler

Banking and restructuring team bolstered by insolvency specialist

NEWS
The Supreme Court has delivered a decisive ruling on termination under the JCT Design & Build form. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Singer KC and Jonathan Ward, of Kings Chambers, analyse Providence Building Services v Hexagon Housing Association [2026] UKSC 1, which restores the first-instance decision and curbs contractors’ termination rights for repeated late payment
Secondments, disciplinary procedures and appeal chaos all feature in a quartet of recent rulings. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, examines how established principles are being tested in modern disputes
The AI revolution is no longer a distant murmur—it’s at the client’s desk. Writing in NLJ this week, Peter Ambrose, CEO of The Partnership and Legalito, warns that the ‘AI chickens’ have ‘come home to roost’, transforming not just legal practice but the lawyer–client relationship itself
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
back-to-top-scroll