High Court Judgement – a response at last!

An intrepid researcher into the deeper workings of RMBC, came across this High Court Judgement.

To say this raises many questions, is the understatement, of the year.

Our inquirer though, is having no sucess in getting the Legal Officer, Jacqueline Collins, to respond to the simplest of questions. Has he come across one of the skeletons? We should be told!

This is the response received recently:

I refer to your e-mail below and apologise for the delay in responding.

In relation to whether this decision  has been released to the general public, it will have been available to the public, via the Court Service, from 25th February.

With regard to the cost implication for Rotherham Borough Council,  its  share of the legal costs incurred by the local authorities who were a party to the court proceedings amounts to £24,578.

The Government’s costs may be payable by the authorities. That issue is still to be decided by the Supreme Court. If these costs are payable by the authorities the maximum which would be payable by Rotherham Council, would be £15,000.

If your query relates to the impact of the reduced European funding on the Borough, as a result of the outcome of the case itself, as stated in the judgment this is likely to be a reduction in funding for South Yorkshire for the period 2014-2020, of around €300 million, compared to the previous funding between 2006 to 2014. This is approximately a 65% cut in funding, as accepted by the Govt. Further the amount of funding proposed is approximately €60 million less than the European Commission notionally allocated for South Yorkshire.

I hope this provides the information you were looking for, but if I can be of further assistance please do not hesitate to contact me.

Yours sincerely,

Jacqueline Collins
Legal and Democratic Services
Resources Directorate
Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council

3 thoughts on “High Court Judgement – a response at last!

  1. I don’t know which fantasy world your intrepid researcher lives in…….. however, the judgement was widely reported at the time in the local, regional and national media. Basically, our dearly beloved government has switched £millions from South Yorks to other areas, completely against the intentions of the EU,

    If you read the judgement, you will see how finally balanced it was, with the judges being split. The big question is “Is it worth a punt of another c£15k to try to get the judgement overturned, with about £30m winnings – mainly to be spent on local infrastructure – if successful?”

    What understatement is in question?


    • @Janet Green.
      “beloved government has switched £millions from South Yorks to other areas, completely against the intentions of the EU”,

      You have obviously read a different version of the judgement than me.
      Page 2,para 9:
      ‘there is no formula for the allocation of funds among regions within Member States.’
      Page 11,para 20.
      ‘This was because in the previous funding period, although they would otherwise have ranked as competitiveness regions, they had received the special “transitional and specific” support provided for by article 8 of the 2006 Regulation. Under the terms of the
      2006 Regulation it had tapered down to nil by 2011.
      In 2007/2013 as a whole, Merseyside and South Yorkshire had received substantially more than competitiveness regions because of the article 8 funding. But by taking 2013 as the base year for the uplift of 15.7%, the Secretary of State chose the year in which Merseyside and South Yorkshire had been entitled to no special transitional
      funding and had received no more than the national average for
      competitiveness regions. By comparison, the other English transition regions had received no special article 8 funding in the previous period and their
      allocations profile in that period had been flat in real terms’

      Where is your illusory “against the intentions of the EU’ mentioned in the judgement?



  2. The term ‘grudging’ comes to mind – and very well done to the intrepid researcher for forcing Collins to produce information.


Leave your comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.