Cash v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & Anor [2015] EWHC 2357 (Admin) (04 August 2015)

Cash v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & Anor [2015] EWHC 2357 (Admin) (04 August 2015)

The inspector lawfully and adequately considered the best interests of the children as a primary consideration in the planning balance, conducted a proper proportionality assessment under Article 8 ECHR, and gave sufficient reasons. The inspector's decision was not irrational or unlawful. The application is dismissed.

Citation
[2015] EWHC 2357 (Admin)
Parties
Claimant: Felix Cash; First Defendant: Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government; Second Defendant: Wokingham Borough Council
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
04 August 2015
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (s.288 TCPA Challenge) / High Court Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Best Interests of Children in Planning Decisions, Article 8 ECHR Proportionality, Judicial Review of Planning Decisions, Enforcement Notices, Temporary Planning Permission
Administrative Law Planning Law Human Rights Best Interests of Children in Planning Decisions Article 8 ECHR Proportionality Judicial Review of Planning Decisions Enforcement Notices Temporary Planning Permission

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 21 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Felix Cash

Claimant

Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government

First Defendant

Wokingham Borough Council

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review (s.288 TCPA Challenge) / High Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the inspector erred in law by failing to give primary consideration to the best interests of children in the planning balance
  2. 2 Whether the inspector's decision was irrational (Wednesbury unreasonableness)
  3. 3 Whether the proportionality assessment under Article 8 ECHR was properly conducted

Ratio Decidendi

The inspector lawfully and adequately considered the best interests of the children as a primary consideration in the planning balance, conducted a proper proportionality assessment under Article 8 ECHR, and gave sufficient reasons. The inspector's decision was not irrational or unlawful. The application is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed