Turner v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & Ors [2015] EWHC 2728 (Admin) (07 October 2015)

Turner v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & Ors [2015] EWHC 2728 (Admin) (07 October 2015)

The Inspector lawfully applied the relevant NPPF provisions, made a rational planning judgment on the impact on Green Belt openness, did not conflate openness with visual impact, and gave adequate and intelligible reasons for his decision; no material error of law or procedural unfairness was established.

Citation
[2015] EWHC 2728 (Admin)
Parties
Claimant: John Turner; First Defendant: Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government; Second Defendant: East Dorset District Council
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
07 October 2015
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Under Section 288 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 / High Court Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Green Belt Policy, Planning Permission, National Planning Policy Framework (nppf), Sustainable Development, Adequacy of Reasons, Openness of Green Belt, Material Considerations in Planning, Section 288 TCPA Challenge
Planning Law Administrative Law Judicial Review Green Belt Policy Planning Permission National Planning Policy Framework (nppf) Sustainable Development Adequacy of Reasons +3 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 4 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

John Turner

Claimant

Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government

First Defendant

East Dorset District Council

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review Under Section 288 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 / High Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Inspector lawfully applied paragraph 89 of the NPPF regarding Green Belt exceptions
  2. 2 Whether the Inspector conflated openness and visual impact
  3. 3 Whether the Inspector gave adequate reasons for finding the development unsustainable

Ratio Decidendi

The Inspector lawfully applied the relevant NPPF provisions, made a rational planning judgment on the impact on Green Belt openness, did not conflate openness with visual impact, and gave adequate and intelligible reasons for his decision; no material error of law or procedural unfairness was established.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed