O'Reilly, R (on the application of) v First Secretary of State & Anor

O'Reilly, R (on the application of) v First Secretary of State & Anor

The Inspector's decision was neither perverse nor procedurally unfair. The claimant had every opportunity to present all relevant evidence, including invoices, and the Inspector's analysis and conclusions were open to him on the evidence. The appeal is dismissed.

Parties
Claimant: Daniel James O'Reilly; First Defendant: First Secretary of State; Second Defendant: London Borough of Brent
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
09 June 2005
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Statutory Appeal / High Court Judgment on Appeal Under Section 289 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Enforcement Notice Appeal, Ground (d) Immunity, Procedural Fairness, Evidential Burden
Planning Law Administrative Law Enforcement Notice Appeal Ground (d) Immunity Procedural Fairness Evidential Burden

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

Parties

Daniel James O'Reilly

Claimant

First Secretary of State

First Defendant

London Borough of Brent

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Statutory Appeal / High Court Judgment on Appeal Under Section 289 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Inspector's decision to dismiss the ground (d) appeal was perverse or procedurally unfair
  2. 2 Whether the claimant had a fair opportunity to address the Inspector's concerns regarding invoice evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The Inspector's decision was neither perverse nor procedurally unfair. The claimant had every opportunity to present all relevant evidence, including invoices, and the Inspector's analysis and conclusions were open to him on the evidence. The appeal is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Claimant to pay the first defendant's costs, assessed at £3,000