Nottinghamshire County Council v Secretary Of State For Environment, Transport & Regions & Anor [2001] EWHC Admin 293 (29th March, 2001)

Nottinghamshire County Council v Secretary Of State For Environment, Transport & Regions & Anor [2001] EWHC Admin 293 (29th March, 2001)

The Inspector was not bound to apply the BWB probability test to future use cases; it was lawful for the Inspector to refuse residential development based on the desirability of preserving the option for educational use, even without finding it was more likely than not that the site would be used for a school; previous authorities extending the BWB test to future use cases were wrongly decided.

Citation
[2001] EWHC Admin 293
Parties
Claimant: Nottinghamshire County Council; First Defendant: Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions; Second Defendant: Newark and Sherwood District Council
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Under S.288 Town and Country Planning Act 1990 / Final Judgment
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Material Planning Considerations, Development Plan Policies, Safeguarding Land for Public Purposes, Application of Probability Tests in Planning Decisions
Administrative Law Planning Law Material Planning Considerations Development Plan Policies Safeguarding Land for Public Purposes Application of Probability Tests in Planning Decisions

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

Parties

Nottinghamshire County Council

Claimant

Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions

First Defendant

Newark and Sherwood District Council

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review Under S.288 Town and Country Planning Act 1990 / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Inspector applied the correct legal test (BWB test) in refusing planning permission for residential development
  2. 2 Whether the Inspector was bound to apply the BWB probability test to future use cases
  3. 3 Whether the Inspector's reasoning and safeguarding conclusions were lawful

Ratio Decidendi

The Inspector was not bound to apply the BWB probability test to future use cases; it was lawful for the Inspector to refuse residential development based on the desirability of preserving the option for educational use, even without finding it was more likely than not that the site would be used for a school; previous authorities extending the BWB test to future use cases were wrongly decided.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed

Orders

  • Application to quash the Inspector's decision refused