Wiltshire Council v Secretary of State for Housing Communities and Local Government & Anor [2022] EWHC 36 (Admin) (14 January 2022)

Wiltshire Council v Secretary of State for Housing Communities and Local Government & Anor [2022] EWHC 36 (Admin) (14 January 2022)

The inspector did not misinterpret national or local policy, properly weighed landscape and heritage harm, and his planning judgment was rational and lawful. The claim fails on all grounds.

Citation
[2022] EWHC 36 (Admin)
Parties
Claimant: Wiltshire Council; First Defendant: Secretary of State for Housing Communities and Local Government; Second Defendant: Greystoke Land Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
14 January 2022
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (planning) / High Court Judgment on Challenge to Planning Inspector's Decision
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Interpretation of Planning Policy, Entry Level Affordable Housing, Heritage Assets, Weight to Planning Policies, Judicial Review of Planning Decisions
Planning Law Administrative Law Local Government Law Interpretation of Planning Policy Entry Level Affordable Housing Heritage Assets Weight to Planning Policies Judicial Review of 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 4 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Wiltshire Council

Claimant

Secretary of State for Housing Communities and Local Government

First Defendant

Greystoke Land Limited

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review (planning) / High Court Judgment on Challenge to Planning Inspector's Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the planning inspector misinterpreted national policy (NPPF 71) on entry-level affordable housing
  2. 2 Whether the inspector misinterpreted local policy (Wiltshire Core Strategy CP 58) regarding conservation of the landscape and heritage assets
  3. 3 Whether the inspector erred in assessing harm to the setting of a Grade II listed church

Ratio Decidendi

The inspector did not misinterpret national or local policy, properly weighed landscape and heritage harm, and his planning judgment was rational and lawful. The claim fails on all grounds.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed

Orders

  • Draft order to be filed within 14 days of hand down; consequential matters to be dealt with by written submissions if not agreed