Malvern Hills District Council v The Secretary of State for Housing, Communities And Local Government & Anor [2021] EWHC 129 (Admin) (27 January 2021)

Malvern Hills District Council v The Secretary of State for Housing, Communities And Local Government & Anor [2021] EWHC 129 (Admin) (27 January 2021)

The Inspector did not err in law in his treatment of the public footpath, properly considered and applied the relevant development plan policies and NPPF, and reached rational conclusions on the evidence regarding the necessity and feasibility of on-site storage for the steam crane. The grounds of appeal were rejected as they amounted to disagreements with planning judgment rather than legal error or procedural unfairness.

Citation
[2021] EWHC 129 (Admin)
Parties
Claimant: Malvern Hills District Council; First Defendant: The Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government; Second Defendant: Ross-on-Wye Steam Engine Society Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 January 2021
Procedural Posture
Planning Statutory Appeal (s.289 Town and Country Planning Act 1990) / High Court Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Enforcement Notice Appeal, Planning Permission, Heritage Asset Protection, Public Right of Way, Interpretation of Development Plan Policies, National Planning Policy Framework (nppf) Compliance
Planning Law Administrative Law Local Government Law Enforcement Notice Appeal Planning Permission Heritage Asset Protection Public Right of Way Interpretation of Development Plan Policies +1 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 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Malvern Hills District Council

Claimant

The Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government

First Defendant

Ross-on-Wye Steam Engine Society Limited

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Planning Statutory Appeal (s.289 Town and Country Planning Act 1990) / High Court Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Inspector erred in law by failing to treat the blocking of a public footpath as a material consideration under NPPF §98
  2. 2 Whether the Inspector failed to consider the availability of alternative brownfield sites as required by Policy SWDP 34(iv)
  3. 3 Whether the Inspector acted unfairly or irrationally in concluding that alternative storage for the steam crane was not readily available

Ratio Decidendi

The Inspector did not err in law in his treatment of the public footpath, properly considered and applied the relevant development plan policies and NPPF, and reached rational conclusions on the evidence regarding the necessity and feasibility of on-site storage for the steam crane. The grounds of appeal were rejected as they amounted to disagreements with planning judgment rather than legal error or procedural unfairness.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed