Hunston Properties Ltd v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government [2013] EWHC 2678 (Admin) (05 September 2013)

Hunston Properties Ltd v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government [2013] EWHC 2678 (Admin) (05 September 2013)

The Inspector erred in law by adopting a constraints-adjusted housing need figure from a revoked regional strategy rather than the full objectively assessed need as required by the NPPF. The proper approach is to assess actual housing need using the best available evidence, then consider whether unmet need and other factors clearly outweigh Green Belt harm. The Cabinet/Council error was immaterial. The costs award was a reasonable exercise of discretion and not irrational.

Citation
[2013] EWHC 2678 (Admin)
Parties
Claimant: Hunston Properties Ltd; First Defendant: Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government; Second Defendant: St Albans City and District Council
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
05 September 2013
Procedural Posture
Section 288 TCPA Challenge and Judicial Review / High Court Judgment Following Hearing
Outcome
Section 288 appeal allowed; Inspector's decision quashed. Permission to continue judicial review granted but claim dismissed.
Legal Topics
Green Belt Development, Housing Need Assessment, National Planning Policy Framework (nppf), Section 288 Town and Country Planning Act 1990, Costs in Planning Inquiries
Planning Law Administrative Law Judicial Review Green Belt Development Housing Need Assessment National Planning Policy Framework (nppf) Section 288 Town and Country Planning Act 1990 Costs in Planning Inquiries

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 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Hunston Properties Ltd

Claimant

Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government

First Defendant

St Albans City and District Council

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Section 288 TCPA Challenge and Judicial Review / High Court Judgment Following Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Inspector erred in law by using a constraints-adjusted housing need figure rather than the full objectively assessed need under the NPPF
  2. 2 Whether the Inspector's reliance on a Cabinet resolution rather than a full Council decision was a material error
  3. 3 Whether the partial costs award against the Claimant was irrational

Ratio Decidendi

The Inspector erred in law by adopting a constraints-adjusted housing need figure from a revoked regional strategy rather than the full objectively assessed need as required by the NPPF. The proper approach is to assess actual housing need using the best available evidence, then consider whether unmet need and other factors clearly outweigh Green Belt harm. The Cabinet/Council error was immaterial. The costs award was a reasonable exercise of discretion and not irrational.

Court Disposition

Section 288 appeal allowed; Inspector's decision quashed. Permission to continue judicial review granted but claim dismissed.

Orders

  • Inspector's decision dismissing the s.78 appeal is quashed.
  • Judicial review claim regarding costs is dismissed.