Turner v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & Ors [2015] EWHC 375 (Admin) (26 February 2015)

Turner v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & Ors [2015] EWHC 375 (Admin) (26 February 2015)

The inspector's reliance on the BNPP report for viability was lawful and sufficient; procedural breaches did not cause prejudice; the inquiry's conduct, though unsatisfactory, did not establish apparent bias; the development's loss of open space was justified by improved quality; and no substantial harm to heritage assets was found.

Citation
[2015] EWHC 375 (Admin)
Parties
Claimant: George Turner; 1st Defendant: Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government; 2nd Defendant: The Mayor of London; 3rd Defendant: The Shell International Petroleum Company and Braeburn Estates Ltd Partnership; 4th Defendant: The London Borough of Lambeth
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
26 February 2015
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (planning) / Final Judgment
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Affordable Housing, Economic Viability, Procedural Fairness, Heritage Assets, Open Space, Bias in Decision Making
Planning Law Administrative Law Affordable Housing Economic Viability Procedural Fairness Heritage Assets Open Space Bias in Decision Making

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 6 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

George Turner

Claimant

Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government

1st Defendant

The Mayor of London

2nd Defendant

The Shell International Petroleum Company and Braeburn Estates Ltd Partnership

3rd Defendant

The London Borough of Lambeth

4th Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review (planning) / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the inspector erred in law regarding economic viability and affordable housing provision
  2. 2 Whether procedural impropriety or apparent bias occurred during the inquiry
  3. 3 Whether the loss of open space was contrary to planning policy

Ratio Decidendi

The inspector's reliance on the BNPP report for viability was lawful and sufficient; procedural breaches did not cause prejudice; the inquiry's conduct, though unsatisfactory, did not establish apparent bias; the development's loss of open space was justified by improved quality; and no substantial harm to heritage assets was found.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed