GDFC Assets Limited v Carol Heaney & Anor
[2024] UKUT 345 (AAC)
Daniel Farmiloe v Gas and Electricity Markets Authority
11 October 2024
[2024] EWHC 2584 (Admin)
High Court
Mr. Farmiloe sued Ofgem twice for delaying approval of his green energy system grant. The judge ruled that Ofgem had the right to check if Mr. Farmiloe's application was accurate, rejecting his claim that they were being unfair. The judge's decision followed a similar earlier ruling in the same case, showing that Ofgem had authority to thoroughly check the application. Basically, Ofgem needs to ensure that taxpayers' money is spent appropriately on subsidies.
Key Facts
- •Daniel Farmiloe applied for accreditation of a ground source heat pump (GSHP) system under the Domestic Renewable Heat Incentive Scheme (DRHI).
- •His application attracted a potentially high subsidy and was flagged for manual review.
- •Ofgem requested a site audit, which resulted in a lower estimated heat demand and reduced subsidy.
- •Farmiloe challenged Ofgem's decision to require a new EPC and a further site inspection via judicial review.
- •This is the second judicial review brought by Farmiloe against Ofgem concerning this application.
- •The application is the last remaining undetermined application under the now-closed scheme.
Legal Principles
Issue estoppel: A final decision in previous proceedings between the same parties prevents relitigation of the same issue.
R (Farmiloe) v Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy [2019] EWHC 2981 (Admin)
Precedent: High Court judges are bound by previous High Court decisions unless convinced they are wrong.
R v HM Coroner for Greater Manchester ex p. Tal [1985] QB 67
Statutory interpretation: Regulations should be construed to achieve their purpose, considering the context and relevant policy objectives (including preventing improper use of public funds).
Lang J's judgment in the first claim (sections 61-65)
Legitimate expectation: To establish a legitimate expectation, a clear, unambiguous, and unqualified representation from the relevant authority is required.
R (Donald) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2024] EWHC 1492 (Admin), [108]-[122]
Proportionality: Interference with Article 8 and/or A1P1 ECHR rights must be proportionate to a legitimate aim.
Sections 29
Outcomes
Claim dismissed.
The claimant's arguments were inconsistent with previous High Court findings and rested on a narrow interpretation of the regulatory scheme. Ofgem's actions were found to be within its statutory powers and proportionate.
Grounds A1 and A2 (challenging the site inspection decision as ultra vires and for improper purpose) failed.
Lang J's previous ruling on the site inspection power was followed due to issue estoppel and persuasive reasoning. The court found that Ofgem had a proper basis for the inspection, given discrepancies in EPC heat demand estimates.
Grounds C1-C3 and C5 (challenging the failure to accredit as ultra vires, procedural failures, irrelevant considerations, and breach of legitimate expectation) failed.
These grounds were inconsistent with Lang J's previous findings. The court held that Ofgem was not obligated to accredit before gathering necessary information to determine if conditions were needed.
Similar Cases
Lullington Solar Park Ltd v Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities & Anor
[2024] EWHC 295 (Admin)
Dr Andrew Boswell, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero
[2024] EWHC 2128 (Admin)
E.ON Next Energy Limited, R (on the application of) v The Gas and Electricity Markets Authority
[2023] EWHC 2891 (Admin)
British Gas Trading Limited, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero
[2023] EWHC 737 (Admin)