Ecotricity Next Generation Ltd v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & Anor

Ecotricity Next Generation Ltd v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & Anor

The Inspector made a material mistake of fact regarding the visual relationship between the proposed turbine and St Peter's Church, which played a significant part in her reasoning and resulted in unfairness to the Claimant, amounting to an error of law. The Inspector also failed to adequately explain which heritage assets were affected and to what extent, further prejudicing the Claimant.

Parties
Claimant: Ecotricity Next Generation Ltd; First Defendant: Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government; Second Defendant: Torridge District Council
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
04 February 2015
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (planning) / Judgment on Application to Quash Planning Decision
Outcome
Application allowed; Inspector's decision quashed.
Legal Topics
Judicial Review, Planning Permission, Heritage Assets, Mistake of Fact, Adequacy of Reasons
Administrative Law Planning Law Heritage Law Judicial Review Planning Permission Heritage Assets Mistake of Fact Adequacy of 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 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ecotricity Next Generation Ltd

Claimant

Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government

First Defendant

Torridge District Council

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

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

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Inspector failed to have proper regard to material considerations in the form of the Council’s Landscape Character Assessment and Landscape Sensitivity Assessment and failed to give adequate reasons
  2. 2 Whether the Inspector erred in her findings and conclusions on heritage assets, specifically the setting of St Peter's Church

Ratio Decidendi

The Inspector made a material mistake of fact regarding the visual relationship between the proposed turbine and St Peter's Church, which played a significant part in her reasoning and resulted in unfairness to the Claimant, amounting to an error of law. The Inspector also failed to adequately explain which heritage assets were affected and to what extent, further prejudicing the Claimant.

Court Disposition

Application allowed; Inspector's decision quashed.

Orders

  • The Inspector’s decision dated 7 July 2014 is quashed.