Glenholme Developments Ltd v The Welsh Ministers & Anor

Glenholme Developments Ltd v The Welsh Ministers & Anor

The inspector was entitled to conclude that the 1989 permission was not lawfully implemented due to failure to approve all reserved matters, that the 2005 amendment or permission did not retrospectively validate earlier works or extend the permission, and that landscaping approval was central, not peripheral. The inspector correctly applied the legal principles and did not err in law.

Parties
Claimant: Glenholme Developments Limited; First Defendant: The Welsh Ministers; Second Defendant: Pembrokeshire County Council
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
10 December 2013
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Statutory Appeal Under Section 288 Town and Country Planning Act 1990 / Judgment on Appeal From Administrative Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Lawful Development Certificates, Outline Planning Permission, Reserved Matters, Time Limits for Implementation, Section 73 Applications, Retrospective Permission, Enforcement Immunity
Planning Law Administrative Law Lawful Development Certificates Outline Planning Permission Reserved Matters Time Limits for Implementation Section 73 Applications Retrospective Permission +1 more

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 5 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Glenholme Developments Limited

Claimant

The Welsh Ministers

First Defendant

Pembrokeshire County Council

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Statutory Appeal Under Section 288 Town and Country Planning Act 1990 / Judgment on Appeal From Administrative Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the 1989 outline planning permission was lawfully implemented
  2. 2 Whether the 2005 amendment or permission validated or extended the original permission
  3. 3 Whether failure to approve landscaping details rendered the development unlawful

Ratio Decidendi

The inspector was entitled to conclude that the 1989 permission was not lawfully implemented due to failure to approve all reserved matters, that the 2005 amendment or permission did not retrospectively validate earlier works or extend the permission, and that landscaping approval was central, not peripheral. The inspector correctly applied the legal principles and did not err in law.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed