Steer v Secretary of State for Communities And Local Government & Ors [2017] EWHC 1456 (Admin) (22 June 2017)

Steer v Secretary of State for Communities And Local Government & Ors [2017] EWHC 1456 (Admin) (22 June 2017)

The Inspector erred in law by adopting an unlawfully narrow interpretation of 'setting' that required a visual or physical connection, contrary to the broad approach mandated by national policy and guidance, and failed to give adequate reasons for rejecting expert and statutory consultee evidence on the historic, social, and economic associations of the site with Kedleston Hall.

Citation
[2017] EWHC 1456 (Admin)
Parties
Claimant: Peter John Steer; First Defendant: Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government; Second Defendant: Catesby Estates Limited; Third Defendant: Amber Valley Borough Council; Interested Party: Historic England
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
22 June 2017
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (section 288 TCPA 1990) / High Court Judgment
Outcome
Claim allowed; Inspector's decision quashed.
Legal Topics
Listed Buildings, Conservation Areas, Heritage Asset Setting, Judicial Review, Planning Permission, National Planning Policy Framework (nppf), Adequacy of Reasons
Planning Law Administrative Law Heritage Law Listed Buildings Conservation Areas Heritage Asset Setting Judicial Review Planning Permission +2 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 3 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Peter John Steer

Claimant

Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government

First Defendant

Catesby Estates Limited

Second Defendant

Amber Valley Borough Council

Third Defendant

Historic England

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review (section 288 TCPA 1990) / High Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Inspector adopted an unlawfully narrow approach to the setting of Kedleston Hall by requiring a visual or physical connection.
  2. 2 Whether the Inspector gave adequate reasons for rejecting the objectors' approach to setting, including that of statutory consultees.

Ratio Decidendi

The Inspector erred in law by adopting an unlawfully narrow interpretation of 'setting' that required a visual or physical connection, contrary to the broad approach mandated by national policy and guidance, and failed to give adequate reasons for rejecting expert and statutory consultee evidence on the historic, social, and economic associations of the site with Kedleston Hall.

Court Disposition

Claim allowed; Inspector's decision quashed.

Orders

  • The decision of the Inspector dated 22 August 2016 is quashed.
  • The matter is remitted for redetermination in accordance with the law.