Barratt Developments Plc v City of Wakefield Metropolitan District Council & Anor

Barratt Developments Plc v City of Wakefield Metropolitan District Council & Anor

Policy CS6, as interpreted, set a justifiable target for affordable housing on qualifying sites, provided flexibility through negotiation based on economic viability, and was supported by a robust evidence base. The Inspector's approach was rational and compliant with national and regional policy. The claim that the policy was outside statutory power was dismissed.

Parties
Claimant: Barratt Developments PLC; First Defendant: City of Wakefield Metropolitan District Council; Second Defendant: Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
10 December 2009
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Final Judgment
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Affordable Housing Policy, Local Development Plans, Economic Viability Assessment, Judicial Review of Planning Decisions
Planning Law Administrative Law Affordable Housing Policy Local Development Plans Economic Viability Assessment Judicial Review of Planning Decisions

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 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Barratt Developments PLC

Claimant

City of Wakefield Metropolitan District Council

First Defendant

Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Wakefield's adoption of policy CS6 was outside the appropriate power under PCPA 2004
  2. 2 Whether the Core Strategy failed to conform with sections 19 and 24 of PCPA 2004
  3. 3 Whether the affordable housing target was justified and deliverable

Ratio Decidendi

Policy CS6, as interpreted, set a justifiable target for affordable housing on qualifying sites, provided flexibility through negotiation based on economic viability, and was supported by a robust evidence base. The Inspector's approach was rational and compliant with national and regional policy. The claim that the policy was outside statutory power was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed