Considers the challenging of planning permissions by third parties applying for judicial review in the light of "R v Environment Agency and others ex p Edwards" ([2004] EWHC 736 (Admin), unreported). Historically, courts tried to limit the ability of objectors to bring applications for judicial review by restrictively interpreting the rules as to locus but recently judges have favoured a more liberal interpretation that makes even tenuous links between a development and a third party sufficient for locus and the securing of public funding. In "Edwards", the standing of the claimant (E) was disputed by the respondent and the judge inferred that E had been put up as a claimant to secure public funding The claim was allowed to proceed because the claimant had been affected by the respondent's issue of a permit and nothing prevented him from having a sufficient interest in bringing the claim and gaining access to public funding.