Clee v The First Secretary of State & Anor [2008] EWHC 117 (Admin) (31 January 2008)

Clee v The First Secretary of State & Anor [2008] EWHC 117 (Admin) (31 January 2008)

The Inspector did consider whether to grant temporary planning permission as required by Circular 01/2006 and was entitled, as a matter of planning judgment, to refuse it. No error of law or misapplication of policy was established. The Inspector's approach to local plan policy and the fallback position was not materially erroneous, and the Article 8 ECHR balancing exercise was properly conducted.

Citation
[2008] EWHC 117 (Admin)
Parties
Claimant: G. Clee; First Defendant: The First Secretary of State; Second Defendant: Stafford Borough Council
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
31 January 2008
Procedural Posture
Appeal Under Section 289 Town and Country Planning Act 1990 / Judgment on Appeal From Inspector's Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Enforcement Notice, Gypsy and Traveller Sites, Green Belt Policy, Temporary Planning Permission, National Policy Guidance, Human Rights (article 8 Echr)
Administrative Law Planning Law Enforcement Notice Gypsy and Traveller Sites Green Belt Policy Temporary Planning Permission National Policy Guidance Human Rights (article 8 Echr)

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 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

G. Clee

Claimant

The First Secretary of State

First Defendant

Stafford Borough Council

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Appeal Under Section 289 Town and Country Planning Act 1990 / Judgment on Appeal From Inspector's Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Inspector failed to consider the grant of temporary planning permission as required by Circular 01/2006
  2. 2 Whether the Inspector misapplied or misunderstood national policy guidance
  3. 3 Whether the Inspector erred in law in his approach to local plan policy HOU21

Ratio Decidendi

The Inspector did consider whether to grant temporary planning permission as required by Circular 01/2006 and was entitled, as a matter of planning judgment, to refuse it. No error of law or misapplication of policy was established. The Inspector's approach to local plan policy and the fallback position was not materially erroneous, and the Article 8 ECHR balancing exercise was properly conducted.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal under section 289 Town and Country Planning Act 1990 is dismissed