[2006] EWHC 2189 (Admin), 25 August 2006. Considers whether a local authority's decision not to sell land to a developer was vitiated by predetermination and bias. I sought to purchase from B a site earmarked for employment usage which adjoined land it had permission to develop in order to facilitate its development plans. Both parties entered into negotiations but no agreement was reached before upcoming local elections took place. The new administration froze all sales of land pending review which determined not sell the land to I so as to preserve future employment opportunities. I contended that B's decision not to sell had not been made on the merits of the case and was predetermined and biased: B had opposed the instant development in its election manifesto and some councillors had been involved with local actions groups against the development. "Held": application refused. B had considered all relevant matters without preconception and councillors were entitled to apply policies that formed part of an election manifesto. B had not acted irrationally in following the review's advice which was consistent, did not contain errors of act or material omissions.