University of Leicester v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & Anor

University of Leicester v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & Anor

The Inspector erred in law by limiting consideration of extrinsic material to the application form when resolving ambiguity in the planning permissions. Proper consideration of all relevant extrinsic evidence demonstrated that the permissions permitted mixed use for student accommodation and conferences. The refusal of the lawful development certificate was therefore wrong.

Parties
Claimant: University of Leicester; First Defendant: Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government; Second Defendant: Oadby & Wigston Borough Council
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
07 March 2016
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Under S.288 Town and Country Planning Act 1990 / Final Judgment
Outcome
Claim allowed; Inspector's refusal of LDC quashed.
Legal Topics
Interpretation of Planning Permissions, Lawful Development Certificates, Ancillary Use, Section 75 TCPA 1990, Use of Extrinsic Evidence
Planning Law Administrative Law Interpretation of Planning Permissions Lawful Development Certificates Ancillary Use Section 75 TCPA 1990 Use of Extrinsic Evidence

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 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

University of Leicester

Claimant

Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government

First Defendant

Oadby & Wigston Borough Council

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review Under S.288 Town and Country Planning Act 1990 / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the 2004 and 2005 planning permissions permitted mixed use for student accommodation and conferences
  2. 2 Whether conference use was ancillary to student accommodation
  3. 3 Application of s.75(3) TCPA 1990 to the permissions

Ratio Decidendi

The Inspector erred in law by limiting consideration of extrinsic material to the application form when resolving ambiguity in the planning permissions. Proper consideration of all relevant extrinsic evidence demonstrated that the permissions permitted mixed use for student accommodation and conferences. The refusal of the lawful development certificate was therefore wrong.

Court Disposition

Claim allowed; Inspector's refusal of LDC quashed.

Orders

  • University's appeal allowed
  • Lawful development certificate to be granted for mixed use including conference use