South Gloucestershire Council, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for Communities & Local Government & Anor

South Gloucestershire Council, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for Communities & Local Government & Anor

The two decisions (Northfield and index site) are distinguishable because the sites are of different types under PPS3 (large strategic vs. smaller site), requiring different approaches to tenure mix. The Herington Report was treated differently due to new practice guidance considered only in the index site decision. The Inspector's analysis showed no material difference in outcome even if the claimant's preferred tenure mix was adopted. Therefore, no express explanation for the difference was required, and the application is dismissed.

Parties
Claimant: South Gloucestershire Council; First Defendant: Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government; Second Defendant: Redrow Homes (South West) Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
02 September 2008
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Material Considerations in Planning Decisions, Consistency in Administrative Decision Making, Affordable Housing Policy, Interpretation of Local and National Planning Policy
Administrative Law Planning Law Material Considerations in Planning Decisions Consistency in Administrative Decision Making Affordable Housing Policy Interpretation of Local and National Planning Policy

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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

South Gloucestershire Council

Claimant

Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government

First Defendant

Redrow Homes (South West) Limited

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Secretary of State failed to have regard to a material consideration under section 70(2) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 by not considering or explaining departure from a previous decision (Northfield) when allowing the appeal for the index site.
  2. 2 Whether the two decisions (Northfield and index site) were sufficiently similar to require express explanation for any inconsistency.

Ratio Decidendi

The two decisions (Northfield and index site) are distinguishable because the sites are of different types under PPS3 (large strategic vs. smaller site), requiring different approaches to tenure mix. The Herington Report was treated differently due to new practice guidance considered only in the index site decision. The Inspector's analysis showed no material difference in outcome even if the claimant's preferred tenure mix was adopted. Therefore, no express explanation for the difference was required, and the application is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed