Kent Local News Closer to home, faster to you
Council Updates

Two laws, two court cases: Kent’s council shake-up explained

By 9 min read
Illustration of brass scales of justice in front of shelves of law books
Illustration generated by Kent Local News using Leonardo AI

Kent County Council has named the two laws it says it spent under to prepare for reorganisation. The Government has paused the programme to check its own process, and the council has gone to court. Here is what has happened, in plain English.

Part 9 · Kent LGR Investigation · Reader edition

Kent LGR Investigation. This article is one part of a continuing Kent Local News investigation. Read the full series in order. Every part is published twice, as the full investigation and as a plain-English reader edition.

This is the reader edition of Part 9 of Kent Local News’s ongoing investigation into the legal basis for local government reorganisation spending in Kent. The full version, written with the source documents in view, is published here: “Kent County Council named the law it spent under. Now it is in court to make ministers explain theirs.” This reader edition covers the same ground in plain English, explaining legal terms as they come up.

The question, and the answer

Kent’s councils are being reorganised. The plan is to replace the existing councils with new ones. But the legal order that would actually create those new councils, called a Structural Changes Order, has not yet been made. That means the new councils do not legally exist yet.

Despite that, councils across Kent and Medway have been spending money, signing contracts and moving staff to get ready for the new arrangements. Since April 2026, Kent Local News has been asking a single question: under what legal power was that spending done, given that the new councils do not yet exist in law?

In May 2026, KLN put that question formally to the finance and legal officers of all fourteen Kent and Medway councils. None gave a substantive answer. The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG), the government department responsible, said spending was a matter for councils. Across the first eight parts of this series, no Kent council named a legal power to this publication.

Then, on 3 September 2026, 133 days after the question was first put, a Kent County Council spokesperson gave an answer. The council said it relied on: “The general power of competence in section 1 of the Localism Act 2011, and/or expenditure powers that are incidental or conducive to the discharge of their functions under section 111 of the Local Government Act 1972.”

Dover District Council had cited the same two sections earlier, but in response to residents preparing a legal challenge, not to KLN. That was reported in Part 3 of this series in May 2026.

What the two laws say, in plain English

The council pointed to two laws, offered as alternatives.

The first is section 1 of the Localism Act 2011, known as the general power of competence. In plain terms, it says a council “has power to do anything that individuals generally may do.” It is deliberately wide. But it has limits: where an older law restricts something, those same restrictions still apply. It sits alongside the rest of the law and does not override it.

The second is section 111 of the Local Government Act 1972, an older and narrower provision. It allows a council to spend money on things that help it carry out a job it already has by law. The Act’s own words cover things “conducive or incidental to, the discharge of any of their functions.” The key point is that it depends on an existing function to attach to. In other words, the council must already have a legal job to do before this section can be used to support spending connected to it.

Whether either of these sections covers the particular spending done in preparation for reorganisation is the question the residents’ court case asks. No court has ruled on it.

The Government paused to check the law

On 7 September 2026, the Secretary of State, Angela Rayner, told the House of Commons she wanted “to satisfy myself first that the right process is in place, that it is robust and, of course, that it complies with the law.” She said this was “in the light of legal advice” and ordered a full review of reorganisation, asking that activity be paused.

For four areas, Essex, Hampshire, Norfolk and Suffolk, the reorganisation decisions were withdrawn entirely. Kent and Medway were treated differently: the decision of 16 July 2026 was paused, not withdrawn. It remains in place. The Ministry has published no outcome of its review and no timetable for one.

It is important to be clear about what that legal advice covers. It is about the Government’s own process, not about whether councils had the right powers to spend money on preparation. Those are two separate questions. The advice has not been published.

Then the council went to court

On 12 October 2026, Kent County Council announced it was taking legal action against the Government, saying repeated requests for an explanation of why and how the Government reached its decision had gone unanswered. The council’s Leader, Linden Kemkaran, said: “We asked for answers in July. We wrote again twice in August. And we wrote again in September. Each time, our questions remain unanswered.”

The council’s press release stated: “The matter is now with the Government’s legal department and the Court.”

The time limit for challenging the July decision expired on 16 October 2026. No public council meeting considered the decision to go to court, and the council’s register of executive decisions contained no record of it as of 28 October 2026. The council has not said whether a claim has formally been issued, when it was authorised, who authorised it or what it will cost. On 19 October its press office said it is “not able to comment on ongoing legal action”.

Two court cases, from opposite directions

A separate legal challenge was filed at the Administrative Court on 7 August 2026 by a group called the National Residents for Civic Accountability. Their claim names Kent County Council as the defendant, with the Secretary of State as an interested party. It challenges the council’s Decision 26/00028 and what has been done under it.

Sean Turner, a Heritage Party councillor and co-signatory of the residents’ submissions, has said the general power of competence does not authorise spending on a programme where the council has no specific function, and that section 111 covers only things incidental to existing functions. Kent County Council has confirmed it has been served with the claim and has said it will respond in due course.

As of the last account given to KLN, permission, which is the first stage a judicial review must pass before it can proceed to a full hearing, had been neither granted nor refused.

If the council’s own claim has been issued, Kent’s reorganisation would be before the High Court twice: residents asking what power the council had for its spending, and the council asking the Government to explain why and how it reached its July decision. Both cases are untested.

What this does not mean

  • No court has ruled on whether the council’s spending was lawful or unlawful. Nothing has been decided.
  • Nobody has won or lost anything. Both cases are untested.
  • Reorganisation in Kent and Medway has been paused, not cancelled. The July decision remains in place.
  • The Government’s legal advice, which prompted the pause, has not been made public, and it concerns the Government’s own process, not councils’ spending powers.

What is still unanswered

Several questions remain open. Kent County Council has not said whether a reorganisation contract worth more than £1 million, authorised under Decision 26/00028, has been paused or continued since 7 September 2026, and has not named the supplier.

Thirteen other Kent and Medway councils have not told KLN what legal power they spent under. The Ministry has not said when paused areas will learn the outcome of its review. KLN put questions to both the council and the Ministry on 20 October 2026, with a deadline of 5pm on 26 October. The council replied but did not answer the five questions put to it. The Ministry did not respond.

What to watch

Kent County Council’s next full council meeting is on Thursday 5 November 2026 at 10am. Its agenda had not been published as of 28 October 2026. The council’s Devolution and Local Government Reorganisation Cabinet Committee is scheduled to meet on Tuesday 24 November 2026 at 10am.

All parts of this investigation are collected at the full series hub.

Key information

  • The question: under what legal power did Kent’s councils spend on reorganisation before the new councils legally existed
  • Kent County Council’s answer (3 September 2026): section 1 of the Localism Act 2011 and/or section 111 of the Local Government Act 1972
  • Government pause: 7 September 2026; Kent and Medway paused, not withdrawn; the legal advice is unpublished
  • Kent County Council’s legal challenge to the Government: announced 12 October 2026 by press release
  • Residents’ judicial review against Kent County Council: filed 7 August 2026; the council confirmed on 26 October that it has been served
  • No court has ruled in either case
  • Next full council meeting: Thursday 5 November 2026, 10am
⚡

Two laws, two court cases: Kent’s council shake-up explained Quiz

5 questions

Sources

About this edition: this is the plain-English reader edition of Part 9. Every fact in it is drawn from the full investigation, which sets out the source documents, the statute wording and the right-of-reply record.

Picture: Illustration generated by Kent Local News using Leonardo AI. Illustrative image; not a photograph of a real place, person or event.

Published: 30 October 2026

The residents’ claim is reported on the claimants’ account and nothing in it has been tested by a court; Kent County Council’s claim is reported from its own published statements. Kent County Council and the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government were given the opportunity to respond to the matters in Part 9 before publication; the council’s reply is reported above, and the Ministry did not respond. If you believe anything here is inaccurate, contact editor@kentlocalnews.co.uk; see our corrections policy.