Cawrey Ltd v Secretary of State for Communities And Local Government & Anor

Cawrey Ltd v Secretary of State for Communities And Local Government & Anor

The Inspector lawfully found the proposed development conflicted with Development Plan policies RES5 and NE5 due to substantial landscape harm, gave full weight to those policies as the housing land supply was adequate, and properly balanced material considerations including affordable housing and compliance with CS8; no legal error or inadequacy of reasoning was established.

Parties
Claimant: Cawrey Limited; First Defendant: Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government; Second Defendant: Hinckley and Bosworth Borough Council
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 May 2016
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (s.288 TCPA 1990) / Final Judgment
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Interpretation of National Planning Policy Framework (nppf), Development Plan Compliance, Landscape Impact, Housing Supply, Sustainable Development, Material Considerations
Planning Law Administrative Law Interpretation of National Planning Policy Framework (nppf) Development Plan Compliance Landscape Impact Housing Supply Sustainable Development Material Considerations

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 6 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Cawrey Limited

Claimant

Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government

First Defendant

Hinckley and Bosworth Borough Council

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review (s.288 TCPA 1990) / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Inspector failed to provide adequate reasons or took into account immaterial considerations regarding landscape impact
  2. 2 Whether the Inspector properly considered conflict with Development Plan policies RES5 and NE5 and their weight in light of NPPF
  3. 3 Whether the Inspector considered sustainable development and the presumption in favour under NPPF

Ratio Decidendi

The Inspector lawfully found the proposed development conflicted with Development Plan policies RES5 and NE5 due to substantial landscape harm, gave full weight to those policies as the housing land supply was adequate, and properly balanced material considerations including affordable housing and compliance with CS8; no legal error or inadequacy of reasoning was established.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed