Winifred Helen Ward v Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities & Anor

Winifred Helen Ward v Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities & Anor

The Inspector lawfully applied the relevant planning policies, gave appropriate and sufficient weight to all material considerations including the best interests of the children, and provided adequate reasons for her decision. The refusal of temporary planning permission was not irrational or disproportionate, and the proportionality assessment under Article 8 ECHR was lawfully and adequately conducted. No error of law was established.

Parties
Claimant: Winifred Helen Ward; First Defendant: Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities; Second Defendant: Basildon District Council
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 November 2024
Procedural Posture
Statutory Review Under Section 288 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 / Judgment After Full Hearing
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Green Belt Development, Traveller Site Provision, Article 8 ECHR, Best Interests of the Child, Statutory Review, Proportionality, Irrationality, Local Plan Policy, Temporary Planning Permission
Planning Law Human Rights Law Administrative Law Green Belt Development Traveller Site Provision Article 8 ECHR Best Interests of the Child Statutory Review +4 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 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Winifred Helen Ward

Claimant

Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities

First Defendant

Basildon District Council

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Statutory Review Under Section 288 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 / Judgment After Full Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Inspector's refusal of temporary planning permission for a traveller site in the Green Belt was irrational or disproportionate
  2. 2 Whether the Inspector gave proper weight to the best interests of the children as a primary consideration
  3. 3 Whether the Inspector's planning balance and proportionality assessment under Article 8 ECHR was lawful and adequately reasoned

Ratio Decidendi

The Inspector lawfully applied the relevant planning policies, gave appropriate and sufficient weight to all material considerations including the best interests of the children, and provided adequate reasons for her decision. The refusal of temporary planning permission was not irrational or disproportionate, and the proportionality assessment under Article 8 ECHR was lawfully and adequately conducted. No error of law was established.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed

Orders

  • The claim for statutory review is dismissed.