Epping Forest District Council, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government & the Regions

Epping Forest District Council, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government & the Regions

The Inspector had evidence before him regarding the number of horticultural holdings with dwellings and reasonably concluded there was no demand for the property at any price that could reasonably be expected to be paid by someone meeting the occupancy condition; the Inspector's reasoning was not flawed and he properly applied the relevant policy and material.

Parties
Claimant: Epping Forest District Council; First Defendant: The Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions; Second Defendant: Mr R A F Emery; Third Defendant: Mrs J P Emery
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
07 March 2005
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Judgment
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Agricultural Occupancy Conditions, Development Plan Policy, Judicial Review of Planning Decisions, Market Value Assessment, Costs
Planning Law Administrative Law Agricultural Occupancy Conditions Development Plan Policy Judicial Review of Planning Decisions Market Value Assessment Costs

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

Parties

Epping Forest District Council

Claimant

The Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions

First Defendant

Mr R A F Emery

Second Defendant

Mrs J P Emery

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Inspector's decision on demand for dwellings subject to an agricultural occupancy condition was perverse
  2. 2 Whether the Inspector failed to determine if the property was marketed at a realistic price reflecting the occupancy condition

Ratio Decidendi

The Inspector had evidence before him regarding the number of horticultural holdings with dwellings and reasonably concluded there was no demand for the property at any price that could reasonably be expected to be paid by someone meeting the occupancy condition; the Inspector's reasoning was not flawed and he properly applied the relevant policy and material.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed

Orders

  • Claimants to pay the First Defendant's costs, summarily assessed at £6,710
  • Claimants to pay Mr and Mrs Emery's costs, summarily assessed at £1,233.75