Redhill Aerodrome Ltd v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & Ors [2014] EWHC 2476 (Admin) (18 July 2014)

Redhill Aerodrome Ltd v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & Ors [2014] EWHC 2476 (Admin) (18 July 2014)

Under the NPPF, non-Green Belt harms that do not individually meet the threshold for refusal should not be included as 'any other harm' in the Green Belt balancing exercise under paragraph 88. The Inspector erred in law by including such harms, and the decision is therefore quashed.

Citation
[2014] EWHC 2476 (Admin)
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 Under S 288 Town and Country Planning Act 1990 / High Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed; Inspector's decision quashed.
Legal Topics
Green Belt Policy, Interpretation of National Planning Policy Framework (nppf), Planning Permission, Judicial Review, Material Considerations in Planning, Cumulative Harm in Planning Decisions
Planning Law Administrative Law Green Belt Policy Interpretation of National Planning Policy Framework (nppf) Planning Permission Judicial Review Material Considerations in Planning Cumulative Harm in 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 10 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 Under S 288 Town and Country Planning Act 1990 / High Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether 'any other harm' in NPPF paragraph 88 includes non-Green Belt harm that does not individually meet the threshold for refusal
  2. 2 Whether the Inspector erred in law by including non-Green Belt harms below NPPF refusal thresholds in the Green Belt balancing exercise

Ratio Decidendi

Under the NPPF, non-Green Belt harms that do not individually meet the threshold for refusal should not be included as 'any other harm' in the Green Belt balancing exercise under paragraph 88. The Inspector erred in law by including such harms, and the decision is therefore quashed.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; Inspector's decision quashed.

Orders

  • Decision of the Inspector dated 18 February 2014 quashed.
  • Parties invited to make submissions on final order and costs.