Watson, R (on the application of) v London Borough of Richmond Upon Thames & Ors

Watson, R (on the application of) v London Borough of Richmond Upon Thames & Ors

The failure to take account of the TAP report did not amount to a failure to have regard to a material consideration, as all substantive points were already considered and there was no real possibility the planning committee would have reached a different conclusion if the report had been considered.

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 / Appeal From High Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Material Considerations in Planning Decisions, Judicial Review of Planning Permission, Failure to Consider Advisory Panel Report
Administrative Law Planning Law Material Considerations in Planning Decisions Judicial Review of Planning Permission Failure to Consider Advisory Panel Report

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 / Appeal From High Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether failure to consider the Twickenham Advisory Panel (TAP) report was a breach of statutory duty to have regard to material considerations under section 70(2) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990

Ratio Decidendi

The failure to take account of the TAP report did not amount to a failure to have regard to a material consideration, as all substantive points were already considered and there was no real possibility the planning committee would have reached a different conclusion if the report had been considered.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed