Forest of Dean District Council v Secretary of State for Communities & Local Government & Anor [2016] EWHC 421 (Admin) (04 March 2016)

Forest of Dean District Council v Secretary of State for Communities & Local Government & Anor [2016] EWHC 421 (Admin) (04 March 2016)

The inspector erred in law by failing to apply the ordinary (unweighted) balancing exercise required by paragraph 134 of the NPPF when considering less than substantial harm to a designated heritage asset. Paragraph 134 is a specific policy indicating development should be restricted for the purposes of Limb 2 of paragraph 14, so the presumption in favour of development was disapplied. The inspector wrongly applied the weighted test from Limb 1. The error was material and it cannot be said the outcome would inevitably have been the same; therefore, the decision must be quashed.

Citation
[2016] EWHC 421 (Admin)
Parties
Claimant: Forest of Dean District Council; First Defendant: Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government; Second Defendant: Gladman Developments Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
04 March 2016
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (planning) / High Court Judgment on S.288 Town and Country Planning Act 1990 Application
Outcome
Application allowed; inspector's decision quashed.
Legal Topics
Interpretation of National Planning Policy Framework, Heritage Assets, Listed Buildings, Judicial Review of Planning Decisions, Statutory Discretion, Section 288 Town and Country Planning Act 1990
Planning Law Administrative Law Heritage Law Interpretation of National Planning Policy Framework Heritage Assets Listed Buildings Judicial Review of Planning Decisions Statutory Discretion +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 5 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Forest of Dean District Council

Claimant

Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government

First Defendant

Gladman Developments Ltd

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review (planning) / High Court Judgment on S.288 Town and Country Planning Act 1990 Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the planning inspector erred in law by failing to apply the correct test under paragraph 134 of the NPPF when considering less than substantial harm to a designated heritage asset
  2. 2 Whether paragraph 134 of the NPPF is a policy indicating development should be restricted for the purposes of paragraph 14 (Limb 2)
  3. 3 Whether the inspector applied the wrong balancing exercise (weighted vs. ordinary)

Ratio Decidendi

The inspector erred in law by failing to apply the ordinary (unweighted) balancing exercise required by paragraph 134 of the NPPF when considering less than substantial harm to a designated heritage asset. Paragraph 134 is a specific policy indicating development should be restricted for the purposes of Limb 2 of paragraph 14, so the presumption in favour of development was disapplied. The inspector wrongly applied the weighted test from Limb 1. The error was material and it cannot be said the outcome would inevitably have been the same; therefore, the decision must be quashed.

Court Disposition

Application allowed; inspector's decision quashed.

Orders

  • The decision of the planning inspector dated 25 August 2015 is quashed.