District council rules out legal challenge over local government reorganisation

On 25 March 2026, the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, Steve Reed, decided to proceed with “Option 1A”, which will split the district council’s current footprint into two new unitary councils.

There will be four unitary authorities for Hampshire, Portsmouth and Southampton overall, while Isle of Wight Council will remain as a standalone authority.

New Forest District Council’s preferred option had been to be part of a new Mid Hampshire unitary authority.

The decision not to pursue a judicial review came after the local authority received independent legal advice from Jane Oldham of 11KBW and a subsequent opinion from Richard Harwood KC of 39 Essex Chambers which suggested there was no realistic prospect of success.

A report prepared for the Cabinet meeting had said: “Independent advice concludes that, in Counsel’s opinion, ‘none of the potential grounds of challenge that the Secretary of State’s decision and the process leading up to it currently suggest are worth considering, have any real prospect of persuading a court that any material error of law has been made.’ Put another way, Counsel’s view is that ‘a challenge would fail’.”

Commenting on the decision not to pursue a judicial review, Cllr Jill Cleary, New Forest’s Leader, said: "This Council has left no stone unturned in seeking to establish the prospects of overturning the government's LGR decision. We explored all available legal options and sought to identify any grounds that might provide a realistic basis for challenge.

“In light of that, the decision not to pursue a judicial review is not one we have taken lightly, but when two sets of independent legal advice have told us that a judicial review would fail and, ultimately, would not change the government's LGR decision, continuing down that route would not be in the best interests of our residents."

Cllr Cleary added: "I recognise that many people feel very strongly about the plans. We have from the start opposed the option now selected by government and have consistently fought for an option that keeps the Forest whole. 

"We did not support any proposal that would have seen any part of the Forest absorbed into a more urban, city-centred authority. We opposed strongly the boundary changes that would split our historic communities, and unanimously voted to support a submission to government last year that reflected that position clearly and unambiguously."

The council said its focus would now turn to ensuring New Forest residents are strongly represented as LGR moves forward. 

Cllr Cleary said: "I will continue to raise objections with government on the decision they have taken, we fundamentally disagree with the decision. This makes our responsibility to fight for the strongest possible future representation for New Forest residents, even more important. My promise in this remains to best represent our communities, to protect local services, shape future arrangements, and ensure local voices are heard throughout the transition." 

The New Forest Together campaign group, which was behind a petition against splitting up the area, said on its Facebook page last week that it disagreed with the conclusion that there was no meaningful legal route left to challenge Option 1A.

It said had obtained its own independent legal advice from specialist public law counsel which suggested that there were credible grounds  for a legal challenge, particularly around financial sustainability, public service delivery and whether ministers had sufficiently robust evidence before reaching a decision.

The group suggested that this broadly aligned with Hampshire County Council’s position.

Cabinet members at Hampshire are set to discuss the merits of a legal challenge next week and whether to take further advice,

Earlier this week Suffolk County Council became the latest council – after Hampshire, Essex County Council and Norfolk County Council - to confirm it has sent a pre-action protocol letter to the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government about a potential legal challenge to reorganisation in its area.