City & Country Bramshill Ltd v Secretary of State for Housing, Communities

City & Country Bramshill Ltd v Secretary of State for Housing, Communities

The Inspector lawfully applied paragraph 79 NPPF and relevant exceptions, properly exercised planning judgment on heritage harm/benefit, sustainability, and SANG benefits, and correctly disapplied the 'tilted balance'. Only in respect of the reasoning for reuse of buildings under Appeals 7-14 and 16 (Ground 4) did the Inspector fail to provide proper reasons or consider all material factors.

Parties
Claimant/appellant: City & Country Bramshill Limited; First Defendant/respondent: Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government; Second Defendant/respondent: Hart District Council; Third Defendant/first Interested Party: Historic England; Second Interested Party: The National Trust for Places of Historic Interest or Natural Beauty
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 December 2019
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review/statutory Challenge (planning) / Final Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed save for Ground 4 (reuse of buildings); Inspector's decision upheld except as regards reasoning for Appeals 7-14 and 16.
Legal Topics
Development Control, Listed Buildings, Heritage Assets, Enabling Development, Sustainability, Environmental Impact, Statutory Interpretation
Planning Law Heritage Law Administrative Law Development Control Listed Buildings Heritage Assets Enabling Development Sustainability +2 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 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

City & Country Bramshill Limited

Claimant/appellant

Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government

First Defendant/respondent

Hart District Council

Second Defendant/respondent

Historic England

Third Defendant/first Interested Party

The National Trust for Places of Historic Interest or Natural Beauty

Second Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review/statutory Challenge (planning) / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Inspector lawfully applied paragraph 79 of the NPPF regarding isolated homes
  2. 2 Whether the Inspector lawfully assessed optimum viable use and enabling development exceptions
  3. 3 Whether the Inspector lawfully conducted the heritage harm/benefit balancing exercise under NPPF and local policies

Ratio Decidendi

The Inspector lawfully applied paragraph 79 NPPF and relevant exceptions, properly exercised planning judgment on heritage harm/benefit, sustainability, and SANG benefits, and correctly disapplied the 'tilted balance'. Only in respect of the reasoning for reuse of buildings under Appeals 7-14 and 16 (Ground 4) did the Inspector fail to provide proper reasons or consider all material factors.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed save for Ground 4 (reuse of buildings); Inspector's decision upheld except as regards reasoning for Appeals 7-14 and 16.

Orders

  • Ground 4 upheld; parties to make submissions on discretion and costs.
  • All other grounds dismissed; Inspector's decisions stand.