Dr Caroline Rye v Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities & Ors

Dr Caroline Rye v Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities & Ors

The Inspector made a material error of fact by proceeding on the mistaken belief that certain trees depicted as retained on the Tree Protection Plan had not been felled, when in fact they had been removed prior to the site visit. This mistake was objectively verifiable, not caused by the claimant, and played a material part in the Inspector's assessment of the impact on the character and appearance of the area and the Conservation Area. The error rendered the planning permission unlawful and the decision must be quashed.

Parties
Claimant: Dr Caroline Rye; First Defendant: Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities; Second Defendant: Derek Warwick Developments; Third Defendant: South Downs National Park Authority
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 October 2024
Procedural Posture
Statutory Review Under Section 288 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 / Judgment After Substantive Hearing
Outcome
Claim allowed; planning permission quashed
Legal Topics
Material Error of Fact, Statutory Review, Planning Permission, Conservation Areas, Judicial Review
Planning Law Administrative Law Material Error of Fact Statutory Review Planning Permission Conservation Areas 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 4 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dr Caroline Rye

Claimant

Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities

First Defendant

Derek Warwick Developments

Second Defendant

South Downs National Park Authority

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Statutory Review Under Section 288 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 / Judgment After Substantive Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Planning Inspector made a material error of fact regarding the retention of trees on the site
  2. 2 Whether the error rendered the planning permission unlawful

Ratio Decidendi

The Inspector made a material error of fact by proceeding on the mistaken belief that certain trees depicted as retained on the Tree Protection Plan had not been felled, when in fact they had been removed prior to the site visit. This mistake was objectively verifiable, not caused by the claimant, and played a material part in the Inspector's assessment of the impact on the character and appearance of the area and the Conservation Area. The error rendered the planning permission unlawful and the decision must be quashed.

Court Disposition

Claim allowed; planning permission quashed

Orders

  • The decision granting planning permission dated 6 December 2022 is quashed on ground 1.