Euro Garages Ltd v The Secretary of State for Communities And Local Government & Anor [2018] EWHC 1753 (Admin) (11 July 2018)

Euro Garages Ltd v The Secretary of State for Communities And Local Government & Anor [2018] EWHC 1753 (Admin) (11 July 2018)

The Inspector erred in law by treating any change as having a greater impact on the openness of the Green Belt, failing to properly assess whether the limited infilling would cause actual harm or greater impact, and not adequately considering visual impact. The reasoning was insufficient and the policy was misapplied.

Citation
[2018] EWHC 1753 (Admin)
Parties
Claimant: Euro Garages Limited; First Defendant: The Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government; Second Defendant: Cheshire West and Chester Council
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 July 2018
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (section 288 Town and Country Planning Act 1990) / Final Judgment
Outcome
Claim allowed; Inspector's decision quashed.
Legal Topics
Green Belt Policy, National Planning Policy Framework, Planning Permission, Judicial Review, Interpretation of Policy
Planning Law Administrative Law Green Belt Policy National Planning Policy Framework Planning Permission Judicial Review Interpretation of Policy

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Euro Garages Limited

Claimant

The Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government

First Defendant

Cheshire West and Chester Council

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

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

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Inspector's decision refusing planning permission was lawful under section 288 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990
  2. 2 Proper interpretation and application of NPPF Green Belt policy, specifically paragraph 89 bullet point [6]
  3. 3 Adequacy of reasons in the Inspector's decision letter

Ratio Decidendi

The Inspector erred in law by treating any change as having a greater impact on the openness of the Green Belt, failing to properly assess whether the limited infilling would cause actual harm or greater impact, and not adequately considering visual impact. The reasoning was insufficient and the policy was misapplied.

Court Disposition

Claim allowed; Inspector's decision quashed.

Orders

  • The Inspector's decision refusing planning permission is quashed.
  • Euro Garages is granted the relief sought under section 288 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.