Wind Prospect Developments Ltd v Secretary of State for Communities And Local Government & Anor

Wind Prospect Developments Ltd v Secretary of State for Communities And Local Government & Anor

The Secretary of State's decision letter provided proper, adequate and intelligible reasons for disagreeing with the Inspector's recommendations; he correctly applied the relevant statutory duties and legal principles, and exercised his planning judgment lawfully. No error of law or irrationality was established.

Parties
Claimant: Wind Prospect Developments Limited; First Defendant: Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government; Second Defendant: East Riding of Yorkshire Council
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
05 December 2014
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Under Section 288 TCPA 1990 / Final Judgment
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Judicial Review, Planning Permission, Renewable Energy, Heritage Assets, Landscape Protection, Statutory Duty to Give Reasons
Administrative Law Planning Law Judicial Review Planning Permission Renewable Energy Heritage Assets Landscape Protection Statutory Duty to Give Reasons

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 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Wind Prospect Developments Limited

Claimant

Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government

First Defendant

East Riding of Yorkshire Council

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review Under Section 288 TCPA 1990 / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Secretary of State failed to give proper, adequate and intelligible reasons for disagreeing with the Inspector's recommendations
  2. 2 Whether the Secretary of State misunderstood or misapplied section 66(1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990
  3. 3 Whether the Secretary of State applied an unintelligible test in relation to tourism and made a factual finding without evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The Secretary of State's decision letter provided proper, adequate and intelligible reasons for disagreeing with the Inspector's recommendations; he correctly applied the relevant statutory duties and legal principles, and exercised his planning judgment lawfully. No error of law or irrationality was established.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed