Ms Rachel Minch:

As the Deputy noted, there are differing views on whether this is a helpful provision. There is already provision for a public body to correct an error in its decision. It is quite narrow in scope, but it is there in section 146A of the 2000 Act and in section 131 of the draft Bill. Otherwise, where proceedings have issued, the option is already there for the decision-maker to realise they have made a mistake, see their decision will be quashed, ask to take it back and then the court can make directions and the decision is made again. There are, therefore, two avenues to deal with errors. Perhaps we could look at those to see if they could be improved upon or if efficiencies could be built into that. The potential issue with this further possible option of public bodies coming forward to say they have made a factual legal error and they are taking it back themselves and what that would mean, for example, for proceedings already in being. Are they adjourned or rendered moot? Then we have an amended decision being made and a further judicial review could then be had on whether the eight-week period then starts to run from that again. We can see it as a potential additional layer of complexity on top of the two options already there.