Watson, R (on the application of) v London Borough of Richmond Upon Thames & Ors [2013] EWCA Civ 513 (15 May 2013)

Watson, R (on the application of) v London Borough of Richmond Upon Thames & Ors [2013] EWCA Civ 513 (15 May 2013)

The failure to take the TAP report into account did not amount to a failure to have regard to a material consideration because all substantive points in the report were already considered by the planning committee through other means. There was no real possibility that consideration of the TAP report would have affected the outcome. The grant of planning permission was therefore not unlawful.

Citation
[2013] EWCA Civ 513
Parties
Claimant/appellant: John Phillip Watson; Defendant/1st Respondent: London Borough of Richmond upon Thames; Interested Party/2nd Respondent: Solum Regeneration Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
15 May 2013
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (planning) Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From High Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Material Considerations in Planning Decisions, Failure to Consider Advisory Reports, Statutory Duty Under Town and Country Planning Act 1990, Role of Advisory Panels in Planning, Discretionary Relief in Judicial Review
Administrative Law Planning Law Judicial Review Material Considerations in Planning Decisions Failure to Consider Advisory Reports Statutory Duty Under Town and Country Planning Act 1990 Role of Advisory Panels in Planning Discretionary Relief in Judicial Review

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

John Phillip Watson

Claimant/appellant

London Borough of Richmond upon Thames

Defendant/1st Respondent

Solum Regeneration Limited

Interested Party/2nd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review (planning) Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Council's failure to consider the Twickenham Advisory Panel (TAP) report amounted to a failure to have regard to a material consideration under section 70(2) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990
  2. 2 Whether such failure rendered the grant of planning permission unlawful and justified quashing the permission

Ratio Decidendi

The failure to take the TAP report into account did not amount to a failure to have regard to a material consideration because all substantive points in the report were already considered by the planning committee through other means. There was no real possibility that consideration of the TAP report would have affected the outcome. The grant of planning permission was therefore not unlawful.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed