Sarah Leadbetter, R (on the application of) v The Secretary of State for Transport

3 February 2023

[2023] EWHC 210 (Admin)

High Court

A group sued the government because a rule about how high sidewalks should be might be dangerous for blind people. The judge said the government should have done more research and consulted better, but it wasn't so unreasonable to keep the rule as it is for now, since they are doing more research soon.

Key Facts

•The claimant challenged guidance issued by the Secretary of State for Transport recommending a minimum kerb height of 25mm.
•The claimant argued the guidance was issued without proper inquiry into its effect on visually impaired people, inadequate consultation, and was irrational.
•Three major charities for visually impaired people supported the claimant.
•The guidance repeated a 1998 figure without clear evidence of its basis.
•Research in 2009 suggested a minimum detectable kerb height of 60mm.
•Subsequent reports consistently called for further research before recommending a minimum kerb height.
•The consultation process involved a short online survey and workshops with limited time for feedback.
•The Secretary of State maintained the 25mm figure pending further research expected in 2023.

Legal Principles

Common law duty of enquiry requires a decision-maker to ask the right questions and take reasonable steps to obtain relevant information.

Secretary of State for Education & Science v Tameside [1977] AC 1014

Public Sector Equality Duty (Equality Act 2010, s.149) requires public authorities to have due regard to eliminating discrimination and advancing equality of opportunity.

Equality Act 2010, s.149

Judicial review does not involve an appeal on the merits of governmental decisions; the court only intervenes if the decision is irrational.

R (Campaign Against Arms Trade) v Secretary of State for International Trade [2019] EWCA 1020

Consultation processes must be fair, providing sufficient time for meaningful responses.

R v North and East Devon Health Authority ex p Coughlan [2001] QB 213

Outcomes

Grounds 1 and 3 (duty of enquiry and rationality) were not made out.

While further research was needed, the court considered maintaining the 25mm figure a matter of political judgment given the pending research, the broad scope of the guidance, and the guidance's emphasis on engagement.

Ground 2 (consultation) succeeded.

The 12-day online survey and short timeframe for the workshops were insufficient, particularly given the accessibility issues for visually impaired individuals and the lack of urgency.

Declaratory relief granted regarding the lack of proper consultation.

The court deemed quashing the guidance unnecessary given the expectation of further research and potential review.

Similar Cases

Sarah Leadbetter, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for Transport

[2023] EWCA Civ 1496

Better Streets for Kensington and Chelsea & Anor., R (on the application of) v The Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea

[2023] EWHC 536 (Admin)