Whitcher v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & Anor

Whitcher v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & Anor

The Inspector lawfully interpreted and applied policy CP13, gave adequate reasons, properly considered the claimant's Article 8 and equality rights, and lawfully weighed all material considerations including the lack of a five-year supply of sites. No error of law was established.

Parties
Claimant: Robert Whitcher; 1st Defendant: Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government; 2nd Defendant: New Forest National Park Authority
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
28 October 2015
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (planning) / Judgment on Application to Quash Planning Inspector's Decision
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Interpretation of Planning Policy, Gypsy and Traveller Site Provision, Article 8 ECHR (right to Family Life), Public Sector Equality Duty, Weight of Material Considerations in Planning, Temporary Planning Permission, Adequacy of Reasons in Administrative Decisions
Administrative Law Planning Law Human Rights Law Equality Law Interpretation of Planning Policy Gypsy and Traveller Site Provision Article 8 ECHR (right to Family Life) Public Sector Equality Duty +3 more

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 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Robert Whitcher

Claimant

Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government

1st Defendant

New Forest National Park Authority

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

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

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Inspector misinterpreted or misapplied policy CP13 regarding need for a site within the National Park
  2. 2 Whether the Inspector gave adequate reasons for his decision
  3. 3 Whether the Inspector lawfully considered the claimant's Article 8 and Equality Act rights

Ratio Decidendi

The Inspector lawfully interpreted and applied policy CP13, gave adequate reasons, properly considered the claimant's Article 8 and equality rights, and lawfully weighed all material considerations including the lack of a five-year supply of sites. No error of law was established.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed