Greenwood v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & Anor

Greenwood v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & Anor

The Inspector and Secretary of State acted within their powers, relied on sufficient evidence, and made no legal or procedural error in confirming the CPO. The property did not meet the Decent Homes Standard, the CPO was not discriminatory, and the process was fair. The interference with the claimant's rights was proportionate and justified by public interest, with compensation and alternative accommodation offered.

Parties
Claimant: Marilyn Rosemary Greenwood; 1st Defendant: Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government; 2nd Defendant: Bristol City Council
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
01 February 2011
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Judgment on Application Under Section 23 of the Acquisition of Land Act 1981
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Compulsory Purchase Order, Decent Homes Standard, Environmental Impact Assessment, Human Rights Act 1998, Alternative Accommodation, Costs
Administrative Law Property Law Human Rights Compulsory Purchase Order Decent Homes Standard Environmental Impact Assessment Human Rights Act 1998 Alternative Accommodation +1 more

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Marilyn Rosemary Greenwood

Claimant

Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government

1st Defendant

Bristol City Council

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Judgment on Application Under Section 23 of the Acquisition of Land Act 1981

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Compulsory Purchase Order (CPO) was lawfully confirmed
  2. 2 Whether the property met the Decent Homes Standard
  3. 3 Whether the CPO was discriminatory for excluding certain properties

Ratio Decidendi

The Inspector and Secretary of State acted within their powers, relied on sufficient evidence, and made no legal or procedural error in confirming the CPO. The property did not meet the Decent Homes Standard, the CPO was not discriminatory, and the process was fair. The interference with the claimant's rights was proportionate and justified by public interest, with compensation and alternative accommodation offered.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Claim dismissed
  • Claimant to pay the costs of the first defendant in a sum not to exceed £7,000