Redhill Aerodrome Ltd v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & Ors

Redhill Aerodrome Ltd v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & Ors

Under the NPPF, non-Green Belt harms that do not individually meet the policy thresholds for refusal (such as 'severe' for transport or 'significant' for noise) cannot be aggregated as 'any other harm' in the Green Belt balancing exercise under paragraph 88. The Inspector erred in law by including such harms in the overall balance. The decision is thus tainted and cannot stand.

Parties
Claimant: Redhill Aerodrome Limited; 1st Defendant: Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government; 2nd Defendant: Tandridge District Council; 3rd Defendant: Reigate and Banstead Borough Council
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 July 2014
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (s.288 Town and Country Planning Act 1990) / Judgment on Application to Quash Planning Inspector's Decision
Outcome
Appeal allowed; Inspector's decision quashed
Legal Topics
Green Belt Policy, Interpretation of National Planning Policy Framework (nppf), Thresholds for Refusal of Planning Permission, Judicial Review of Planning Decisions
Planning Law Administrative Law Green Belt Policy Interpretation of National Planning Policy Framework (nppf) Thresholds for Refusal of Planning Permission Judicial Review of Planning Decisions

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 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Redhill Aerodrome Limited

Claimant

Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government

1st Defendant

Tandridge District Council

2nd Defendant

Reigate and Banstead Borough Council

3rd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review (s.288 Town and Country Planning Act 1990) / Judgment on Application to Quash Planning Inspector's Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether 'any other harm' in NPPF paragraph 88 includes non-Green Belt harm below refusal thresholds
  2. 2 Whether the Inspector erred in law by including non-Green Belt harms in the Green Belt balancing exercise
  3. 3 Whether cumulative non-Green Belt harms below refusal thresholds can be aggregated to justify refusal

Ratio Decidendi

Under the NPPF, non-Green Belt harms that do not individually meet the policy thresholds for refusal (such as 'severe' for transport or 'significant' for noise) cannot be aggregated as 'any other harm' in the Green Belt balancing exercise under paragraph 88. The Inspector erred in law by including such harms in the overall balance. The decision is thus tainted and cannot stand.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; Inspector's decision quashed

Orders

  • Inspector's decision quashed; parties invited to make submissions on final order and costs