Forest of Dean District Council v Secretary of State for Communities And Local Government & Anor

Forest of Dean District Council v Secretary of State for Communities And Local Government & Anor

The inspector did not err in law in his approach to 'valued landscape' under paragraph 109 of the NPPF; even if there was an error, it was not material as the site lacked attributes to be considered 'valued landscape', and planning permission would have been granted regardless.

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Claimant: Forest of Dean District Council; First Defendant: Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government; Second Defendant: Gladman Developments Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
04 October 2016
Procedural Posture
Statutory Application Under Section 288 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 / Judgment on Application to Quash Planning Inspector's Decision
Outcome
Application refused
Legal Topics
Judicial Review of Planning Decisions, Interpretation of National Planning Policy Framework, Landscape Value Assessment
Administrative Law Planning Law Judicial Review of Planning Decisions Interpretation of National Planning Policy Framework Landscape Value Assessment

Source-derived case record

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 3 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Forest of Dean District Council

Claimant

Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government

First Defendant

Gladman Developments Limited

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Statutory Application Under Section 288 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 / Judgment on Application to Quash Planning Inspector's Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Did the planning inspector err in law by equating 'valued landscape' with designated landscape under paragraph 109 of the NPPF?
  2. 2 Was the inspector's error, if any, material to the outcome of the planning decision?

Ratio Decidendi

The inspector did not err in law in his approach to 'valued landscape' under paragraph 109 of the NPPF; even if there was an error, it was not material as the site lacked attributes to be considered 'valued landscape', and planning permission would have been granted regardless.

Court Disposition

Application refused

Orders

  • Application to quash the inspector's decision is dismissed