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

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

The Secretary of State and Inspector correctly interpreted the WCS; objections based on height and scale were not part of Policy WCS6. The Inspector's prior involvement did not affect impartiality. The evidence on height and scale was properly considered under relevant policies. The planning judgment was sound and within the remit of the decision-maker. No legal error was established.

Parties
Claimant: Stroud District Council; First Defendant: Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government; Second Defendant: Urbaser Balfour Beatty; Third Defendant: Gloucestershire County Council
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
10 July 2015
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Under Section 288 TCPA 1990 / Final Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Interpretation of Development Plans, Judicial Review, Planning Permission, Waste Management Policy
Planning Law Administrative Law Interpretation of Development Plans Judicial Review Planning Permission Waste Management Policy

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

Stroud District Council

Claimant

Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government

First Defendant

Urbaser Balfour Beatty

Second Defendant

Gloucestershire County Council

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review Under Section 288 TCPA 1990 / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Secretary of State erred in interpreting the Gloucestershire Waste Core Strategy (WCS) Policy WCS6 and Appendix 5
  2. 2 Whether objections on height and scale could be considered given site allocation
  3. 3 Whether the Inspector's prior involvement affected impartiality

Ratio Decidendi

The Secretary of State and Inspector correctly interpreted the WCS; objections based on height and scale were not part of Policy WCS6. The Inspector's prior involvement did not affect impartiality. The evidence on height and scale was properly considered under relevant policies. The planning judgment was sound and within the remit of the decision-maker. No legal error was established.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed