Unicoin (Dartford) Ltd, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & Anor [2008] EWHC 3214 (Admin) (24 November 2008)

Unicoin (Dartford) Ltd, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & Anor [2008] EWHC 3214 (Admin) (24 November 2008)

The Inspector did not err in law by relying on the envelope of risk from hazardous substances consent and HSE's PADHI methodology rather than the actual site inventory; she was not required to apply a tolerability of risk test or to give determinative weight to HSE's ongoing regulatory controls. The Inspector's reasons were adequate and rational. The application is dismissed.

Citation
[2008] EWHC 3214 (Admin)
Parties
Claimant: Unicoin (Dartford) Limited; First Defendant: Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government; Second Defendant: Dartford Borough Council
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
24 November 2008
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (section 288 Town and Country Planning Act 1990) / High Court Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Hazardous Substances Consent, Land Use Planning, Residual Risk Assessment, COMAH Regulations, Judicial Review Grounds, Planning Permission Refusal
Planning Law Administrative Law Health and Safety Law Hazardous Substances Consent Land Use Planning Residual Risk Assessment COMAH Regulations Judicial Review Grounds +1 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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Unicoin (Dartford) Limited

Claimant

Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government

First Defendant

Dartford Borough Council

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

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

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Inspector erred in law in refusing planning permission for residential development near a hazardous installation based on residual risk and HSE advice
  2. 2 Whether the Inspector failed to apply the correct test under Circular 04/00 and misapplied the tolerability of risk standard
  3. 3 Whether the Inspector failed to use the best available information (actual site inventory) in risk assessment

Ratio Decidendi

The Inspector did not err in law by relying on the envelope of risk from hazardous substances consent and HSE's PADHI methodology rather than the actual site inventory; she was not required to apply a tolerability of risk test or to give determinative weight to HSE's ongoing regulatory controls. The Inspector's reasons were adequate and rational. The application is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Application under Section 288 Town and Country Planning Act 1990 dismissed
  • Claimant to pay First Defendant's costs, summarily assessed at £10,520