Catt, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for Communities & Local Government & Anor

Catt, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for Communities & Local Government & Anor

The grounds of challenge raised no error of law but only disagreement with the inspector's planning judgment. The local authority properly considered the relevant factors before deciding to take direct action. The judicial review proceedings were wholly unarguable and commenced on a false premise.

Parties
Claimant/applicant: Philip Catt; First Defendant/first Respondent: Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government; Second Defendant/first Respondent: London Borough of Barnet
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
25 April 2008
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review and Statutory Planning Appeal / Judgment on Substantive Application and Costs
Outcome
Application for judicial review and section 288 challenge dismissed; injunction discharged; permission to apply for judicial review refused; leave to appeal refused; costs awarded to respondents.
Legal Topics
Judicial Review, Planning Permission, Enforcement Notice, Costs
Administrative Law Planning Law Judicial Review Planning Permission Enforcement Notice Costs

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 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Philip Catt

Claimant/applicant

Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government

First Defendant/first Respondent

London Borough of Barnet

Second Defendant/first Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review and Statutory Planning Appeal / Judgment on Substantive Application and Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the inspector erred in law in refusing planning permission and upholding the enforcement notice
  2. 2 Whether the local authority's decision to take direct action under section 178 was unlawful for failing to consider the section 288 challenge
  3. 3 Whether there was material non-disclosure in the application for interim relief

Ratio Decidendi

The grounds of challenge raised no error of law but only disagreement with the inspector's planning judgment. The local authority properly considered the relevant factors before deciding to take direct action. The judicial review proceedings were wholly unarguable and commenced on a false premise.

Court Disposition

Application for judicial review and section 288 challenge dismissed; injunction discharged; permission to apply for judicial review refused; leave to appeal refused; costs awarded to respondents.

Orders

  • Section 288 application dismissed
  • Judicial review application refused