Dartford Borough Council v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & Anor [2016] EWHC 649 (Admin) (23 March 2016)

Dartford Borough Council v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & Anor [2016] EWHC 649 (Admin) (23 March 2016)

The Inspector's reasoning was adequate and addressed the principal issues. He was entitled to use the available figures for housing need and delivery rates, and his approach was pragmatic and justified in the context. The landscape reasoning was coherent and addressed both character and visual effects. There was no legal error or inadequacy of reasons justifying quashing the decision.

Citation
[2016] EWHC 649 (Admin)
Parties
Claimant: Dartford Borough Council; First Defendant: Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government; Second Defendant: Fairview New Homes Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 March 2016
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Under S.288 Town and Country Planning Act 1990 / High Court Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Housing Land Supply, Development Plan Interpretation, National Planning Policy Framework (nppf), Judicial Review of Planning Decisions, Adequacy of Reasons in Planning Decisions
Planning Law Administrative Law Local Government Law Housing Land Supply Development Plan Interpretation National Planning Policy Framework (nppf) Judicial Review of Planning Decisions Adequacy of Reasons in Planning Decisions

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 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dartford Borough Council

Claimant

Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government

First Defendant

Fairview New Homes Limited

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review Under S.288 Town and Country Planning Act 1990 / High Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Inspector gave adequate reasons for assessing the 5-year housing land supply against the Core Strategy figure of 'up to 17,300'
  2. 2 Whether the Inspector gave adequate reasons for finding the impact on landscape character acceptable

Ratio Decidendi

The Inspector's reasoning was adequate and addressed the principal issues. He was entitled to use the available figures for housing need and delivery rates, and his approach was pragmatic and justified in the context. The landscape reasoning was coherent and addressed both character and visual effects. There was no legal error or inadequacy of reasons justifying quashing the decision.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Application to quash the Inspector's decision is refused.