Kuznetsov & Anor v Secretary of State for Communities And Local Government & Anor [2017] EWHC 2713 (Admin) (26 September 2017)

Kuznetsov & Anor v Secretary of State for Communities And Local Government & Anor [2017] EWHC 2713 (Admin) (26 September 2017)

The court held that the CPO was lawfully confirmed. All statutory procedural requirements, including notice and disclosure, were complied with or any irregularities were remedied. The land acquired was not open space within the meaning of s.19 of the 1981 Act, so special parliamentary procedure was not required. The Council had properly considered alternatives and acted within its powers. There was no procedural unfairness or breach of human rights. The claimants' objections were not supported by evidence and did not establish any ground for quashing the CPO or the vesting declaration.

Citation
[2017] EWHC 2713 (Admin)
Parties
First Claimant: Alexander Kuznetsov; Second Claimant: Braginzuk LLC; First Defendant: Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government; Second Defendant: London Borough of Camden
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
26 September 2017
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review and Statutory Challenge / High Court Judgment Following Rolled Up Hearing
Outcome
Claims dismissed
Legal Topics
Compulsory Purchase Orders, Judicial Review, Procedural Fairness, Acquisition of Land Act 1981, Planning Permission, Special Parliamentary Procedure, Human Rights Act 1998
Administrative Law Compulsory Purchase Planning Law Human Rights Compulsory Purchase Orders Judicial Review Procedural Fairness Acquisition of Land Act 1981 +3 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 5 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 10
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Alexander Kuznetsov

First Claimant

Braginzuk LLC

Second Claimant

Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government

First Defendant

London Borough of Camden

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review and Statutory Challenge / High Court Judgment Following Rolled Up Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the compulsory purchase order (CPO) was lawfully confirmed
  2. 2 Whether procedural requirements under the Acquisition of Land Act 1981 were complied with
  3. 3 Whether special parliamentary procedure under s.19 of the 1981 Act was required

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the CPO was lawfully confirmed. All statutory procedural requirements, including notice and disclosure, were complied with or any irregularities were remedied. The land acquired was not open space within the meaning of s.19 of the 1981 Act, so special parliamentary procedure was not required. The Council had properly considered alternatives and acted within its powers. There was no procedural unfairness or breach of human rights. The claimants' objections were not supported by evidence and did not establish any ground for quashing the CPO or the vesting declaration.

Court Disposition

Claims dismissed

Orders

  • The claims under s.23 of the Acquisition of Land Act 1981 and for judicial review are dismissed.
  • No order quashing the CPO or the general vesting declaration.