Ribble Valley Borough Council, R (On the Application Of) v Hussain [2025] EWHC 2363 (Admin) (25 September 2025)

Ribble Valley Borough Council, R (On the Application Of) v Hussain [2025] EWHC 2363 (Admin) (25 September 2025)

The Inspector's conclusion that the entire site was previously developed land (PDL) was unlawful because he failed to undertake the necessary analysis of the relative proportions of PDL and non-PDL land as required by Broxbourne, did not provide adequate reasons, took into account an irrelevant consideration (equestrian use), and reached an irrational conclusion given the site was largely undeveloped paddocks.

Citation
[2025] EWHC 2363 (Admin)
Parties
Claimant: Ribble Valley Borough Council; First Defendant: Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government; Second Defendant: Majid Hussain
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
25 September 2025
Procedural Posture
Statutory Review Under Section 288 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 / Judgment After Substantive Hearing
Outcome
Claim allowed; planning permission quashed.
Legal Topics
Green Belt Policy, Previously Developed Land (pdl), National Planning Policy Framework (nppf), Statutory Review, Planning Permission, Reasoning and Adequacy of Reasons, Material Considerations, Irrationality
Planning Law Administrative Law Judicial Review Green Belt Policy Previously Developed Land (pdl) National Planning Policy Framework (nppf) Statutory Review Planning Permission +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 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ribble Valley Borough Council

Claimant

Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government

First Defendant

Majid Hussain

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

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

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Inspector lawfully concluded the entire site was previously developed land (PDL) under the NPPF
  2. 2 Whether the Inspector provided adequate reasons for his conclusion on PDL
  3. 3 Whether the Inspector took into account an immaterial consideration (equestrian use)

Ratio Decidendi

The Inspector's conclusion that the entire site was previously developed land (PDL) was unlawful because he failed to undertake the necessary analysis of the relative proportions of PDL and non-PDL land as required by Broxbourne, did not provide adequate reasons, took into account an irrelevant consideration (equestrian use), and reached an irrational conclusion given the site was largely undeveloped paddocks.

Court Disposition

Claim allowed; planning permission quashed.

Orders

  • The Inspector's decision granting planning permission is quashed.