Taylor & Ors v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & Anor

Taylor & Ors v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & Anor

The Inspector lawfully considered the appeals, distinguished between common and individual issues, gave adequate reasons, and was entitled to the weight he gave to need, temporary permissions, and personal circumstances. No material error of law or procedural unfairness occurred. The appeals are dismissed.

Parties
Appellants (eastern Site): Hope and Lisa Taylor; Appellants (western Site): Pacer Sutcliffe and Others; 1st Defendant: Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government; 2nd Defendant: North Warwickshire Borough Council
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
22 March 2012
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Statutory Appeal (planning) / High Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeals dismissed
Legal Topics
Green Belt Development, Gypsy and Traveller Sites, Enforcement Notice Appeals, Temporary Planning Permission, Article 8 ECHR, Need Assessment for Gypsy Sites
Planning Law Administrative Law Human Rights Green Belt Development Gypsy and Traveller Sites Enforcement Notice Appeals Temporary Planning Permission Article 8 ECHR +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 5 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Hope and Lisa Taylor

Appellants (eastern Site)

Pacer Sutcliffe and Others

Appellants (western Site)

Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government

1st Defendant

North Warwickshire Borough Council

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Statutory Appeal (planning) / High Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Inspector failed to consider the two appeals separately and ignored material differences between the sites
  2. 2 Whether the Inspector erred in approach to gypsy status and fallback position for the Eastern site
  3. 3 Whether the Inspector wrongly considered a site with temporary planning permission in assessing need

Ratio Decidendi

The Inspector lawfully considered the appeals, distinguished between common and individual issues, gave adequate reasons, and was entitled to the weight he gave to need, temporary permissions, and personal circumstances. No material error of law or procedural unfairness occurred. The appeals are dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeals dismissed

Orders

  • Appeals under s288 and s289 Town and Country Planning Act 1990 dismissed
  • No planning permission granted