Euro Garages Ltd v The Secretary of State for Communities And Local Government & Anor

Euro Garages Ltd v The Secretary of State for Communities And Local Government & Anor

The Inspector erred by treating any change as having a greater impact on the openness of the Green Belt, rather than assessing whether the change caused actual harm to openness. The Inspector failed to provide adequate reasoning for why the relatively small increases in floor area and volume constituted a greater impact, and did not properly consider visual impact as required by policy and case law. The decision was therefore unlawful and must be quashed.

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 (statutory Challenge Under S.288 Town and Country Planning Act 1990) / Judgment on Merits
Outcome
Claim allowed; Inspector's decision quashed.
Legal Topics
Green Belt Policy, National Planning Policy Framework, Planning Permission, Statutory Interpretation, Judicial Review, Adequacy of Reasons
Planning Law Administrative Law Green Belt Policy National Planning Policy Framework Planning Permission Statutory Interpretation Judicial Review Adequacy of Reasons

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 5 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
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 (statutory Challenge Under S.288 Town and Country Planning Act 1990) / Judgment on Merits

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Inspector's decision letter provided adequate reasons
  2. 2 Proper interpretation and application of NPPF Green Belt policy exceptions
  3. 3 Whether the Inspector lawfully assessed 'greater impact on openness' under NPPF paragraph 89 bullet point 6

Ratio Decidendi

The Inspector erred by treating any change as having a greater impact on the openness of the Green Belt, rather than assessing whether the change caused actual harm to openness. The Inspector failed to provide adequate reasoning for why the relatively small increases in floor area and volume constituted a greater impact, and did not properly consider visual impact as required by policy and case law. The decision was therefore unlawful and must be quashed.

Court Disposition

Claim allowed; Inspector's decision quashed.

Orders

  • The Inspector's decision letter dated 29 November 2017 is quashed.
  • Euro Garages is granted the relief sought under section 288 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.