Council of London Borough of Bexley v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & Anor

Council of London Borough of Bexley v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & Anor

The Inspector did not err in law by treating compliance with some criteria of the development plan as a material consideration; section 38(6) does not require exclusion of such considerations from the overall planning balance. The application is dismissed as the sole ground advanced is contrary to authority and principle.

Parties
Claimant: Council of the London Borough of Bexley; First Defendant: Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government; Second Defendant: Mr George Oner Arslanboga
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
30 July 2009
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (planning) / Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Development Plan Compliance, Material Considerations, Costs Orders
Administrative Law Planning Law Development Plan Compliance Material Considerations Costs Orders

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 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Council of the London Borough of Bexley

Claimant

Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government

First Defendant

Mr George Oner Arslanboga

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review (planning) / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Inspector misdirected himself in law by treating matters relevant to compliance with the development plan as material considerations justifying departure from it under section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

Ratio Decidendi

The Inspector did not err in law by treating compliance with some criteria of the development plan as a material consideration; section 38(6) does not require exclusion of such considerations from the overall planning balance. The application is dismissed as the sole ground advanced is contrary to authority and principle.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Council to pay Secretary of State's costs assessed at £6,410
  • No order for costs in favour of the Second Defendant