Kensworth Builders Ltd v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & Anor [2016] EWHC 1732 (Admin) (04 March 2016)

Kensworth Builders Ltd v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & Anor [2016] EWHC 1732 (Admin) (04 March 2016)

The inspector did not err in law; the origin of the building as houses was not established by evidence and was not a material consideration; the fallback permitted development rights were not properly raised or substantiated; the inspector was entitled to consider change of use in the context of listed building consent; and the viability assessment was reasonable based on the evidence before him.

Citation
[2016] EWHC 1732 (Admin)
Parties
Claimant: Kensworth Builders Limited; First Defendant: Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government; Second Defendant: Central Bedfordshire Council
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
04 March 2016
Procedural Posture
Section 288 Planning Appeal (judicial Review) / High Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Listed Building Consent, Change of Use, Community Asset, Planning Permission, Viability of Community Facilities
Planning Law Administrative Law Heritage Law Listed Building Consent Change of Use Community Asset Planning Permission Viability of Community Facilities

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 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kensworth Builders Limited

Claimant

Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government

First Defendant

Central Bedfordshire Council

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Section 288 Planning Appeal (judicial Review) / High Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the planning inspector erred in law in upholding refusal of planning permission and listed building consent for redevelopment of a listed public house
  2. 2 Whether the inspector failed to consider material considerations including the building's origin, fallback positions, and viability evidence
  3. 3 Whether the inspector lawfully considered change of use in the context of listed building consent

Ratio Decidendi

The inspector did not err in law; the origin of the building as houses was not established by evidence and was not a material consideration; the fallback permitted development rights were not properly raised or substantiated; the inspector was entitled to consider change of use in the context of listed building consent; and the viability assessment was reasonable based on the evidence before him.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed.