Jewson Holdings Ltd., R (on the application of) v Vale of the White Horse District Council

Jewson Holdings Ltd., R (on the application of) v Vale of the White Horse District Council

The inspector was entitled to conclude that the case for enabling development had not been made out due to the absence of full market testing and insufficient evidence that alternative development strategies had been explored. The inspector's reasoning was adequate and in accordance with the relevant policy guidance; thus, the claim fails.

Parties
Claimant: Jewson Holdings Limited; 1st Defendant: First Secretary of State and the Deputy Prime Minister; 2nd Defendant: Vale of the White Horse District Council
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 March 2003
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (planning) / Judgment
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Enabling Development, Green Belt Policy, Listed Buildings, Planning Permission, Adequacy of Reasons, Material Considerations
Planning Law Administrative Law Enabling Development Green Belt Policy Listed Buildings Planning Permission Adequacy of Reasons Material Considerations

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

Parties

Jewson Holdings Limited

Claimant

First Secretary of State and the Deputy Prime Minister

1st Defendant

Vale of the White Horse District Council

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review (planning) / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the inspector failed to take into account material considerations, specifically the English Heritage policy guidance on enabling development
  2. 2 Whether the inspector gave proper, adequate, and intelligible reasons for the decision, particularly regarding whether the proposed development was the minimum necessary to secure the repair and long-term future of the listed buildings

Ratio Decidendi

The inspector was entitled to conclude that the case for enabling development had not been made out due to the absence of full market testing and insufficient evidence that alternative development strategies had been explored. The inspector's reasoning was adequate and in accordance with the relevant policy guidance; thus, the claim fails.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed

Orders

  • Claim dismissed
  • Claimant to pay defendant's costs, summarily assessed at £4,663.50