RAF Scampton: Future hangs in balance ahead of council's critical judicial review

After a lengthy legal process, West Lindsey Council received approval last week to seek a judicial review of the Home Office’s plans for the disused airbase.

During a two-day permission hearing at London’s Royal Courts of Justice, the council argued the government’s approach to housing up to 2,000 asylum seekers at the base was unlawful.

The case will soon reappear before the High Court, accompanied by claims from Braintree Council and resident Gabriel Clarke-Holland, who maintain similar plans to house up to 1,700 migrants at MWP Wethersfield in Essex are also unlawful.

While no official date has yet been scheduled for this final stage of the legal process, the question arises: what could this mean for the future of the cherished base?

What is a judicial review?

A judicial review requires a judge to determine whether a decision made by a public body – in this case the Home Office – was legal. It does not look at whether it was right or wrong, but challenges the way a decision has been made.

For RAF Scampton, the review is being carried out on the grounds that the government was incorrect to rely on the Environmental Impact Assessment screening decision and Class Q planning permission.

Before proceeding to the judicial review, the claimant – in this case West Lindsey Council – will need to specify the outcome it is hoping to achieve.

Options include:

• Mandatory Order, requiring a public body to perform an action that the law mandates;
• Prohibitory Order, preventing a public body from making an unlawful decision or executing an action it has not yet initiated;
• Quashing Order, reversing a decision that has already been taken;
• Injunction, a temporary order compelling a public body to perform a certain action while awaiting a decision.

With Scampton, a quashing order is likely to be the choice, although deliberations about the council’s strategy are ongoing.

What happens if the review is successful?

If successful, this legal action will block the Home Office from using the former RAF base as an asylum centre.

However, time is a key factor and it is not clear when the hearing will be held.

During a recent meeting that decided the fate of Guy Gibson’s dog’s grave, Gainsborough MP Sir Edward Leigh warned, even if permission was granted for a judicial review, the council still might not be able to delay the arrival of the first group. The initial wave of 200 men, predominantly from Afghanistan, Iraq, and Iran, is expected to arrive in mid-August.

What happens if the review is unsuccessful?

If the council’s legal challenge falls short, it would indicate the judge believes the original decision by the Home Office was executed in a justifiable manner.

If so, permission to appeal this decision at the Court of Appeal can be sought.

Should this happen, plans to house migrants at the historic base are set to go forward, although the duration remains uncertain.

The migrant camp is projected to process about 5,000 young men in its first year of operation, but only housing up to 2,000 at any given time.

Contractor Serco will be responsible for supervising those housed at the site. It has recently started hiring field operations, partnership, and risk assurance managers.

While the site will be self-contained, migrants living there will have the freedom to come and go as they please.

So far, the plans have delayed a £300 million heritage, tourism, and enterprise project from Scampton Holdings.

The scheme was poised to generate thousands of high-skilled jobs for the area. However, growing concerns indicate investors may divert their resources elsewhere if the government’s plans are implemented.