Councillors at Welsh local authority drop judicial review over mosque plans

The claimants have, however, urged Monmouthshire County Council to consider a legal opinion which suggests a dead of variation is flawed and could potentially lead to further legal challenge.

The Monmouthshire Muslim Community Association (MMCA) acquired a 30-year lease of Carnegie Library in Abergavenny in June after setting out proposals to use the Grade II listed building as both a mosque and community centre.

However, Cllr Louise Brown, Cllr Rachel Buckler and Cllr Simon Howarth, along with local resident, John Hardwick, issued a pre-action protocol letter last month, arguing that the lease violates Section 123 of the Local Government Act 1972, which requires councils to obtain best value unless specific conditions are met.

The claimants have now abandoned their challenge, and have instead implored the council to consider a legal opinion which raises concerns about a 120-year-old restrictive covenant attached to the building.

The restrictive covenant in the original 1905 conveyance was designed to protect residents of neighbouring almshouses from nuisance or disturbance, limiting the use of the Library building to specific purposes such as a public library, museum, or school of art.

In 2022, the council secured a dead of release and variation of the original covenant, aimed at allowing broader use of the building.

However, the legal opinion from Paul Stafford of Ten Old Square, concluded that this 2022 covenant is legally invalid due to multiple procedural and statutory failures.

Stafford described the 2022 dead of variance as "void" or "voidable".

"If void, it is of no effect", his letter said.

It added: "if voidable, it remains in effect until set aside, and that could be done by application to the High Court at any time at the instance of the Charity Commission, or anyone with sufficient interest in the matter such as a resident of the almshouses."

A Monmouthshire County Council spokesperson said: "Monmouthshire County Council can confirm that there will be no judicial review. The potential case being brought has been abandoned.

"Whilst the Council cannot know the minds of the authors of the pre-action protocol letter, the strength and legal clarity of the Council rebuttal of the points raised will likely have been a material influence in their decision not to proceed."

It added that the council “has absolute confidence in its decision-making and governance arrangements”.

Adam Carey