Ockham Parish Council v Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities & Ors

Ockham Parish Council v Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities & Ors

The inspector's decision was lawful, rational, and adequately reasoned on all challenged grounds. No arguable error or misdirection was demonstrated regarding planning policy interpretation, trip generation, traffic regulation orders, cycling infrastructure policy, or Habitats Regulations Assessment. The costs decision findings were reasonable and within the inspector's jurisdiction.

Parties
Claimant: Ockham Parish Council; First Defendant: Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities; Second Defendant: Guildford Borough Council; Third Defendant: Taylor Wimpey UK Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 February 2025
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Renewed Application for Permission
Outcome
Permission refused
Legal Topics
Planning Permission, Judicial Review, Development Plan Compliance, Habitats Regulations Assessment, Costs Decision
Planning Law Administrative Law Environmental Law Planning Permission Judicial Review Development Plan Compliance Habitats Regulations Assessment Costs Decision

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 6 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ockham Parish Council

Claimant

Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities

First Defendant

Guildford Borough Council

Second Defendant

Taylor Wimpey UK Limited

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Renewed Application for Permission

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the inspector misinterpreted or misapplied local plan policy A35 regarding access arrangements
  2. 2 Whether the inspector's evaluation of trip generation and traffic impacts was irrational
  3. 3 Whether reliance on future traffic regulation orders for cyclist safety was lawful

Ratio Decidendi

The inspector's decision was lawful, rational, and adequately reasoned on all challenged grounds. No arguable error or misdirection was demonstrated regarding planning policy interpretation, trip generation, traffic regulation orders, cycling infrastructure policy, or Habitats Regulations Assessment. The costs decision findings were reasonable and within the inspector's jurisdiction.

Court Disposition

Permission refused

Orders

  • Application to renew permission refused
  • No permission granted for judicial review