The subject of Development Consent Order (DCO) judicial reviews has been a point of contention for major scheme promoters, often stirring up challenges and unpredictability. For a significant project or development, acquiring a DCO can stretch across many years, involving tedious processes and extensive deliberations.
As experienced legal professionals, we are all too familiar with the stage-setter for this drawn-out drama. The government, after diligently considering numerous factors, takes the final call on granting the DCO. However, the finale is followed by a potential ‘judicial review’ orchestrated by the courts. In the most unfavourable scenarios, this could culminate in a scheme promoter being left empty-handed, with no consent secured and concurrently dealing with a substantial programme issue.
The recent analysis by Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner provides an insightful perspective into the intricacies of DCO judicial reviews, shedding light on the valuable lessons surmised from recent judgments. Legal professionals and major corporations who regularly find themselves navigating the complex labyrinth of DCOs may find this briefing particularly enlightening, contributing to a more focused approach when handling future DCO applications and managing the risks associated with subsequent judicial reviews.
Drawing from recent judgments may seem like a reactive approach to many but learning from these experiences can prove to be proactive in handling similar situations in the future. A cautious and informed approach towards DCOs judicial reviews, backed by lessons learned, could potentially make a significant difference to prospective scheme promoters.