Braintree District Council v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & Ors

Braintree District Council v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & Ors

The Inspector correctly interpreted and applied NPPF 55 by giving 'isolated' its ordinary meaning and considering the physical context of the site, not proximity to services and facilities. The Claimant's restrictive interpretation was not supported by the policy's wording or context. The application to quash the planning decision is dismissed.

Parties
Claimant: Braintree District Council; First Defendant: Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government; Second Defendant: Greyread Limited; Third Defendant: Granville Developments Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
15 November 2017
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (planning) / Judgment on Application to Quash Planning Decision
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Interpretation of National Planning Policy Framework (nppf), Meaning of 'isolated Homes' in Rural Planning, Section 288 Town and Country Planning Act 1990 Challenges
Planning Law Administrative Law Interpretation of National Planning Policy Framework (nppf) Meaning of 'isolated Homes' in Rural Planning Section 288 Town and Country Planning Act 1990 Challenges

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 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Braintree District Council

Claimant

Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government

First Defendant

Greyread Limited

Second Defendant

Granville Developments Limited

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review (planning) / Judgment on Application to Quash Planning Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Proper interpretation of 'isolated homes in the countryside' under NPPF 55
  2. 2 Whether the Inspector misapplied NPPF 55 in granting planning permission

Ratio Decidendi

The Inspector correctly interpreted and applied NPPF 55 by giving 'isolated' its ordinary meaning and considering the physical context of the site, not proximity to services and facilities. The Claimant's restrictive interpretation was not supported by the policy's wording or context. The application to quash the planning decision is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed

Orders

  • The application to quash the Inspector's decision is dismissed.