Borough of Telford and Wrekin v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & Anor

Borough of Telford and Wrekin v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & Anor

The Inspector did not err in law in his treatment of settlement boundary policy, interpretation of Policy OL6, application of NPPF 112, or conclusion that Policy CS7 was out-of-date. The Inspector's planning judgments were within his remit, and no public law error or irrationality was established.

Parties
Claimant: Borough of Telford and Wrekin; First Defendant: Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government; Second Defendant: Gladman Developments Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
01 December 2016
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (statutory Review Under Section 288 TCPA 1990) / Judgment After Substantive Hearing and Renewed Application for Permission
Outcome
Application refused; permission to quash the Inspector's decision is denied.
Legal Topics
Interpretation of Planning Policy, Material Considerations in Planning Decisions, National Planning Policy Framework (nppf), Development Plan Conformity, Best and Most Versatile Agricultural Land, Heritage Assets, Sustainable Development, Weight of Planning Considerations
Planning Law Administrative Law Judicial Review Interpretation of Planning Policy Material Considerations in Planning Decisions National Planning Policy Framework (nppf) Development Plan Conformity Best and Most Versatile Agricultural Land +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 4 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Borough of Telford and Wrekin

Claimant

Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government

First Defendant

Gladman Developments Limited

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review (statutory Review Under Section 288 TCPA 1990) / Judgment After Substantive Hearing and Renewed Application for Permission

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Inspector erred in treating the Council’s grant of planning permission for a Sustainable Urban Extension as material to settlement boundary policy being out-of-date
  2. 2 Whether the Inspector erred in his approach to Wrekin Local Plan Policy OL6
  3. 3 Whether NPPF 112 is a restrictive policy under NPPF 14

Ratio Decidendi

The Inspector did not err in law in his treatment of settlement boundary policy, interpretation of Policy OL6, application of NPPF 112, or conclusion that Policy CS7 was out-of-date. The Inspector's planning judgments were within his remit, and no public law error or irrationality was established.

Court Disposition

Application refused; permission to quash the Inspector's decision is denied.