Horsham District Council v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & Anor [2015] EWHC 109 (Admin) (23 January 2015)

Horsham District Council v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & Anor [2015] EWHC 109 (Admin) (23 January 2015)

The inspector lawfully exercised his planning judgment in applying paragraph 64 of the NPPF, was not required to reject the proposal because a better scheme might be possible, gave adequate reasons, and did not act unfairly. The challenge fails on both grounds.

Citation
[2015] EWHC 109 (Admin)
Parties
Claimant: Horsham District Council; First Defendant: Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government; Second Defendant: Barratt Southern Counties Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 January 2015
Procedural Posture
Section 288 Challenge Under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 / High Court Judgment
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Interpretation of Planning Policy, Procedural Fairness in Planning Appeals, Application of National Planning Policy Framework (nppf), Design Quality in Planning Decisions
Planning Law Administrative Law Judicial Review Interpretation of Planning Policy Procedural Fairness in Planning Appeals Application of National Planning Policy Framework (nppf) Design Quality in Planning Decisions

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 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Horsham District Council

Claimant

Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government

First Defendant

Barratt Southern Counties Limited

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Section 288 Challenge Under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 / High Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the inspector's approach to the loss of views from the appeal site was unlawful under paragraph 64 of the NPPF
  2. 2 Whether the inspector's conduct of the appeal was procedurally unfair

Ratio Decidendi

The inspector lawfully exercised his planning judgment in applying paragraph 64 of the NPPF, was not required to reject the proposal because a better scheme might be possible, gave adequate reasons, and did not act unfairly. The challenge fails on both grounds.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed

Orders

  • Application under section 288 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 refused
  • Inspector's decision to grant planning permission stands