Wokingham Borough Council v Secretary of State for Housing, Communities And Local Government & Anor

Wokingham Borough Council v Secretary of State for Housing, Communities And Local Government & Anor

The Inspector's reasons for affording 'significant' rather than 'full' weight to conflict with development plan policies were intelligible and adequate; the development limits were based on outdated housing requirements, which was a relevant and rational consideration; the Inspector did not fail to have regard to...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Claimant: Wokingham Borough Council; First Defendant: Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government; Second Defendant: Taylor Wimpey UK Limited; Interested Party: Darrell John Beasley; Interested Party: Beverley Anne Beasley
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 November 2019
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (planning) / Final Judgment
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Judicial Review of Planning Decisions, Weight of Development Plan Policies, National Planning Policy Framework, Housing Land Supply, Settlement Boundaries
Administrative Law Planning Law Judicial Review of Planning Decisions Weight of Development Plan Policies National Planning Policy Framework Housing Land Supply Settlement Boundaries

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 5 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 9
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Wokingham Borough Council

Claimant

Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government

First Defendant

Taylor Wimpey UK Limited

Second Defendant

Darrell John Beasley

Interested Party

Beverley Anne Beasley

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review (planning) / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Inspector erred in law by affording 'significant' rather than 'full' weight to conflict with development plan policies restricting development outside settlement limits
  2. 2 Adequacy of reasons given by the Inspector
  3. 3 Rationality of the Inspector's conclusion regarding out-of-date development limits

Ratio Decidendi

The Inspector's reasons for affording 'significant' rather than 'full' weight to conflict with development plan policies were intelligible and adequate; the development limits were based on outdated housing requirements, which was a relevant and rational consideration; the Inspector did not fail to have regard to material considerations or act unfairly; the weight to be given to policies and material considerations was a matter of planning judgment for the Inspector, not the court.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed