Cheshire East Borough Council v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government

Cheshire East Borough Council v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government

The inspector lawfully distinguished between 'valued' and 'designated' landscapes, rationally applied policy NE.4, and properly conducted the planning balance under NPPF paragraph 14, considering all relevant policies and material considerations. No error of law or irrationality was found.

Parties
Claimant: Cheshire East Borough Council; First Defendant: Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government; Second Defendant: Harlequin (Wistaston) Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 February 2016
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Final Judgment
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Development Control, Interpretation of Planning Policy, Sustainable Development, Judicial Review, Costs
Planning Law Administrative Law Development Control Interpretation of Planning Policy Sustainable Development Judicial Review Costs

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

Parties

Cheshire East Borough Council

Claimant

Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government

First Defendant

Harlequin (Wistaston) Limited

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the inspector misunderstood the meaning of 'valued landscape' under NPPF paragraph 109
  2. 2 Whether the inspector's conclusions on policy NE.4 were irrational
  3. 3 Whether the inspector misapplied the test under paragraph 14 of the NPPF

Ratio Decidendi

The inspector lawfully distinguished between 'valued' and 'designated' landscapes, rationally applied policy NE.4, and properly conducted the planning balance under NPPF paragraph 14, considering all relevant policies and material considerations. No error of law or irrationality was found.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed

Orders

  • Claimant to pay Secretary of State's costs in the sum of £6,281