Keep Bourne End Green v Buckinghamshire Council & Anor [2020] EWHC 1984 (Admin) (23 July 2020)

Keep Bourne End Green v Buckinghamshire Council & Anor [2020] EWHC 1984 (Admin) (23 July 2020)

The court held that the Inspector and Council did not err in law by declining to use the 2016-based household projections as the starting point for OAHN, as the projections were not automatically determinative and their reliability for plan-making was reasonably doubted. The Inspector lawfully exercised planning judgment in deciding not to revisit the evidence base or delay the plan. The 2016-based projections were considered but not treated as a material change requiring alteration of the plan. The identification of exceptional circumstances for Green Belt release was a matter of planning judgment, and the Inspector's approach was not irrational or unlawful. The Habitats Regulations...

Citation
[2020] EWHC 1984 (Admin)
Parties
Claimant: Keep Bourne End Green; First Defendant: Buckinghamshire Council (formerly Wycombe District Council); Second Defendant: Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government; First Interested Party: Catesby Estates Plc; Second Interested Party: Leopold Noe
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 July 2020
Procedural Posture
Statutory Review Under S.113 Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 / High Court Judgment
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Local Plans, Green Belt Policy, Housing Need Assessment, Statutory Review, Habitats Regulations Assessment, Procedural Fairness
Planning Law Administrative Law Public Law Local Plans Green Belt Policy Housing Need Assessment Statutory Review Habitats Regulations Assessment +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 21 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Keep Bourne End Green

Claimant

Buckinghamshire Council (formerly Wycombe District Council)

First Defendant

Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government

Second Defendant

Catesby Estates Plc

First Interested Party

Leopold Noe

Second Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Statutory Review Under S.113 Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 / High Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Council and Inspector erred in law by not using the 2016-based household projections as the demographic starting point for OAHN
  2. 2 Whether the 2016-based projections were a material consideration in finalising OAHN and Green Belt release
  3. 3 Whether exceptional circumstances existed for Green Belt release under national policy

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the Inspector and Council did not err in law by declining to use the 2016-based household projections as the starting point for OAHN, as the projections were not automatically determinative and their reliability for plan-making was reasonably doubted. The Inspector lawfully exercised planning judgment in deciding not to revisit the evidence base or delay the plan. The 2016-based projections were considered but not treated as a material change requiring alteration of the plan. The identification of exceptional circumstances for Green Belt release was a matter of planning judgment, and the Inspector's approach was not irrational or unlawful. The Habitats Regulations...

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed

Orders

  • Claim for statutory review dismissed
  • No parts of the Wycombe District Local Plan quashed