Wokingham Borough Council v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & Anor [2017] EWHC 1863 (Admin) (20 July 2017)

Wokingham Borough Council v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & Anor [2017] EWHC 1863 (Admin) (20 July 2017)

The Inspector's imposition of a 10% lapse rate, without giving the Council notice or opportunity to address it, was procedurally unfair. The Inspector also failed to provide adequate reasons for applying both a lapse rate and a 20% buffer, given the Council's case that this amounted to double counting. The decision was therefore unlawful and must be quashed.

Citation
[2017] EWHC 1863 (Admin)
Parties
Claimant: Wokingham Borough Council; First Defendant: Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government; Second Defendant: Cooper Estates Strategic Land Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 July 2017
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (planning) / High Court Judgment on Application to Quash Planning Inspector's Decision
Outcome
Claim allowed; Inspector's decision quashed.
Legal Topics
Housing Land Supply, Planning Appeals, Procedural Fairness, National Planning Policy Framework (nppf), Application of Lapse Rates and Buffers, Judicial Review of Planning Decisions
Administrative Law Planning Law Local Government Law Housing Land Supply Planning Appeals Procedural Fairness National Planning Policy Framework (nppf) Application of Lapse Rates and Buffers +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 3 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Wokingham Borough Council

Claimant

Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government

First Defendant

Cooper Estates Strategic Land Limited

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review (planning) / High Court Judgment on Application to Quash Planning Inspector's Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Inspector's imposition of a 10% 'lapse rate' in addition to a 20% buffer was lawful or involved double counting
  2. 2 Whether the Inspector's decision was procedurally unfair for failing to give the Council notice/opportunity to address the lapse rate
  3. 3 Whether the Inspector made objectively verifiable errors of fact in assessing housing land supply

Ratio Decidendi

The Inspector's imposition of a 10% lapse rate, without giving the Council notice or opportunity to address it, was procedurally unfair. The Inspector also failed to provide adequate reasons for applying both a lapse rate and a 20% buffer, given the Council's case that this amounted to double counting. The decision was therefore unlawful and must be quashed.

Court Disposition

Claim allowed; Inspector's decision quashed.

Orders

  • The Inspector's decision granting outline planning permission is quashed.
  • Matter remitted for redetermination in accordance with the judgment.