London Borough of Bromley, R (on the application of) v First Secretary of State for Transport [2003] EWHC 1499 (Admin) (09 June 2003)

London Borough of Bromley, R (on the application of) v First Secretary of State for Transport [2003] EWHC 1499 (Admin) (09 June 2003)

The Secretaries of State did not err in law in granting planning permission for the hangar. They properly considered the availability and potential future availability of alternative sites, gave adequate reasons for their planning judgment, and were entitled to refuse a personal occupancy condition. The decision was a legitimate exercise of planning judgment, giving greater weight to the current non-availability of alternative sites within the airport.

Citation
[2003] EWHC 1499 (Admin)
Parties
Claimant: London Borough of Bromley; 1st Defendant: First Secretary of State; 2nd Defendant: Secretary of State for Transport; 3rd Defendant: Biggin Hill Airport Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
09 June 2003
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (section 288 Town and Country Planning Act 1990) / High Court Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Green Belt Policy, Planning Permission, Judicial Review, Very Special Circumstances, Alternative Site Assessment, Personal Occupancy Conditions
Administrative Law Planning Law Green Belt Policy Planning Permission Judicial Review Very Special Circumstances Alternative Site Assessment Personal Occupancy Conditions

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

Parties

London Borough of Bromley

Claimant

First Secretary of State

1st Defendant

Secretary of State for Transport

2nd Defendant

Biggin Hill Airport Limited

3rd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review (section 288 Town and Country Planning Act 1990) / High Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Secretaries of State erred in granting planning permission for inappropriate development in the Green Belt by failing to properly consider the availability of alternative sites within the airport.
  2. 2 Whether the Secretaries of State failed to give adequate reasons for their decision, particularly regarding the weight given to present non-availability of alternative sites versus future potential availability.
  3. 3 Whether the Secretaries of State erred in refusing to impose a personal occupancy condition limiting the hangar to Jet Aviation.

Ratio Decidendi

The Secretaries of State did not err in law in granting planning permission for the hangar. They properly considered the availability and potential future availability of alternative sites, gave adequate reasons for their planning judgment, and were entitled to refuse a personal occupancy condition. The decision was a legitimate exercise of planning judgment, giving greater weight to the current non-availability of alternative sites within the airport.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Application to quash planning permission refused.
  • Costs summarily assessed in favour of the defendants in the sum of £5,500.