University College London, R (on the application of) v First Secretary of State & Anor

University College London, R (on the application of) v First Secretary of State & Anor

The inspector was entitled, as a matter of planning judgment, to conclude that the proposed development would harm the character and appearance of the conservation area, including the courtyard environment, the street scene, and the evidence of the historic street pattern. All three factors were relevant under section 72(1), and the inspector's reasoning and balancing exercise were adequate and lawful. There was no error of law and the application to quash the decision was dismissed.

Parties
Claimant: University College London; First Defendant: First Secretary of State; Second Defendant: London Borough of Camden
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
24 November 2004
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (planning) / Judgment on Application to Quash Planning Inspector's Decision
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Conservation Areas, Planning Permission, Section 72(1) Planning (listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990, Judicial Review, Balancing Exercise in Planning, Adequacy of Reasons, Material Considerations
Planning Law Administrative Law Conservation Areas Planning Permission Section 72(1) Planning (listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 Judicial Review Balancing Exercise in Planning Adequacy of Reasons +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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

University College London

Claimant

First Secretary of State

First Defendant

London Borough of Camden

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review (planning) / Judgment on Application to Quash Planning Inspector's Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the planning inspector erred in law in dismissing UCL's appeal against refusal of planning permission for student accommodation and nursery in a conservation area
  2. 2 Whether the inspector failed to take into account material considerations or took into account immaterial considerations
  3. 3 Whether the inspector properly discharged his duty under section 72(1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990

Ratio Decidendi

The inspector was entitled, as a matter of planning judgment, to conclude that the proposed development would harm the character and appearance of the conservation area, including the courtyard environment, the street scene, and the evidence of the historic street pattern. All three factors were relevant under section 72(1), and the inspector's reasoning and balancing exercise were adequate and lawful. There was no error of law and the application to quash the decision was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Claimant to pay the first defendant's costs, summarily assessed at £4,632