Source: All England Reporter
Publisher Citation: [2008] All ER (D) 363 (Jun)
Neutral Citation: [2008] EWHC 1472 (Admin)
Court: Queen's Bench Division, Administrative Court
Judge:

Burnett J
Representation Charles Bear QC and James McClelland (instructed by Eversheds) for the claimant.
  Michael Beloff QC and James Maurici (instructed by Beachcroft LLP) for the defendant.
Judgment Dates: 26 June 2008

Catchwords

Education - Higher education - Higher Education Funding Council - Funding from charities and grants from Higher Education Funding Council - Claimant Higher Education Institution being awarded funding from charity and grant from defendant Higher Education Funding Council for England to conduct medical research - Auditor finding claimant in breach of criterion for 'open competition' in relation to charitable income in obtaining grant - Claimant being required to repay grant to defendant - Claimant refusing to repay grant - Whether Court to act as primary fact-finder in determining if claimant breaching criterion - Meaning of 'open competition' - s 65.

The Case

Education Higher education. A Higher Education Institution's failure to comply with a term or condition upon which it had subsequently been provided with money by the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) did not call for the application of the 'precedent fact' approach. The terms and conditions connected with a payment of a grant were entirely a matter for the HEFCE. Those terms and conditions might themselves be the subject of judicial review. They were not, in reality, closely analogous to the terms and conditions of a contract entered into as a matter of agreement between parties. The term 'open competition' which was referred to in the 'Science and Innovation Investment Framework 2004-2014', the 'Model Financial Memorandum between HEFCE and Institutions', and HEFCE's circular letter 16-2005 and 'Research Activity Survey 2005', was not capable of exhaustive definition.

Practice Areas

If you are a LexisLibrary subscriber you can read more about this case here.

Lexis®Library

  • An Official transcript is the final version of the judgment prepared by shorthand writers. LexisLibrary contains all judgments from the High Court and aboveView Judgment
  • Cases related to this particular case that are related to, or discuss this caseView related cases
  • Commentary discussing this particular case from LexisLibrary's comprehensive range of titles including Butterworths, Halsbury's and TolleyView related commentary
  • The All England Law Reports comprises judgments with headnotes and catchwords indicating the area of law and key issues of the case prepared by legally qualified editorsFind AllER Reports