I had another question that was uncannily similar to this but that concerned
the housing department which had devolved its function to an external
organisation and it was the external organisation that was causing the problem.
Researching extensive case law is beyond the scope of this site.
Barristers charge about £300 per hour for it was VAT as it is very specialised
and does take a considerable length of time. We do quote case door but is one
that springs readily to hand but what you were looking for here is something
which is extremely specialised with regard to the interaction between the
planning department and the Housing head.
Based upon the fact that she will have given me, I cannot see how
any refusal by the housing department could be anything other than unreasonable
if the Planning department have approved it. If the head of legal and
governance (who is very often a solicitor) decides not to approve this, he is
going to have to come up with some pretty convincing reasons as to why.
If he doesn't, then he is going to face, I am sure, an application
from you for judicial review of the decision.
If there had of legal and governance were asking me the question on
here I would tell them that based upon the fact you have given me, I cannot see
any reason to refuse this.
There is a legal argument that says that this is an impossibility
because the head of housing are no longer exists and therefore you do not have
to seek consent. The courts will not enforce an impossibility.
If it was meant to cover whoever took over as head of housing the
agreement would have said that as indeed, many agreements do when they allow
for replacement statute, replacement charities, and general replacement bodies
whereby if a body inherit something or is supposed to do something or a
particular tax is payable the agreement is drafted to allow or any replacement
tax, charity, body, or statute. I hope that makes sense.
In this case, it does not say The Head of Housing "or the Department
or the person which has taken over that role". It is not a particularly strong
argument that it is one that it is worth arguing over. After all who have the
authority to devolve the task to the Head of Legal and governance? Why didn't
they devolve the task to your next door neighbour or to you or to the office
cleaner? Under what authority did they give it to this person? However that is
another complete debate on its own.
Does that answer the question?