East Hertfordshire District Council v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & Anor [2017] EWHC 465 (Admin) (09 March 2017)

East Hertfordshire District Council v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & Anor [2017] EWHC 465 (Admin) (09 March 2017)

The Inspector was entitled to reject the Council's reliance on paragraph 55 of the NPPF as a ground for refusal, as the purpose of Class Q is to facilitate residential conversions of agricultural buildings even in less accessible locations. The threshold for refusing prior approval on grounds of 'undesirability' is higher than for a planning application, and the Inspector's decision was not legally flawed. The costs award against the Council was justified due to unreasonable conduct in persisting with an approach contrary to established guidance and previous decisions.

Citation
[2017] EWHC 465 (Admin)
Parties
Claimant: East Hertfordshire District Council; First Defendant: Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government; Second Defendant: Sue Tepper
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
09 March 2017
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / High Court Judgment
Outcome
Claims dismissed
Legal Topics
Permitted Development Rights, Prior Approval Process, Interpretation of Planning Legislation, Costs in Planning Appeals
Planning Law Administrative Law Permitted Development Rights Prior Approval Process Interpretation of Planning Legislation Costs in Planning Appeals

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 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

East Hertfordshire District Council

Claimant

Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government

First Defendant

Sue Tepper

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / High Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Proper construction of Class Q of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015
  2. 2 Whether the Planning Practice Guidance (PPG) can override the statutory order
  3. 3 Meaning of 'undesirable' in the context of Class Q prior approval

Ratio Decidendi

The Inspector was entitled to reject the Council's reliance on paragraph 55 of the NPPF as a ground for refusal, as the purpose of Class Q is to facilitate residential conversions of agricultural buildings even in less accessible locations. The threshold for refusing prior approval on grounds of 'undesirability' is higher than for a planning application, and the Inspector's decision was not legally flawed. The costs award against the Council was justified due to unreasonable conduct in persisting with an approach contrary to established guidance and previous decisions.

Court Disposition

Claims dismissed

Orders

  • Inspector's decision to grant prior approval upheld
  • Inspector's award of costs against the Council upheld