Barratt Homes (Southern Counties) Ltd. v Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions & Ors [2002] EWHC 1565 (Admin) (15 July 2002)

Barratt Homes (Southern Counties) Ltd. v Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions & Ors [2002] EWHC 1565 (Admin) (15 July 2002)

The Secretary of State's decision letter, when read as a whole and in light of PPG 3, provided adequate reasons for differing from the inspector and was not irrational or perverse. The Secretary of State was entitled to rely on the 'plan, monitor and manage' approach and accept the council's broad supply figures, using monitoring to justify future land releases.

Citation
[2002] EWHC 1565 (Admin)
Parties
Claimant: Barratt Homes (Southern Counties) Limited; First Defendant: Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions; Second Defendant: Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
15 July 2002
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (section 288 Town and Country Planning Act 1990) / High Court Judgment on Application to Quash Secretary of State's Planning Decision
Outcome
Application refused
Legal Topics
Planning Permission, Judicial Review, Housing Land Supply, Reasoning of Administrative Decisions, PPG 3 Policy Interpretation
Administrative Law Planning Law Local Government Law Planning Permission Judicial Review Housing Land Supply Reasoning of Administrative Decisions PPG 3 Policy Interpretation

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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Barratt Homes (Southern Counties) Limited

Claimant

Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions

First Defendant

Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review (section 288 Town and Country Planning Act 1990) / High Court Judgment on Application to Quash Secretary of State's Planning Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Secretary of State gave adequate reasons for disagreeing with the planning inspector's assessment of housing land supply
  2. 2 Whether the Secretary of State's decision was irrational or perverse in light of the evidence and reasoning provided

Ratio Decidendi

The Secretary of State's decision letter, when read as a whole and in light of PPG 3, provided adequate reasons for differing from the inspector and was not irrational or perverse. The Secretary of State was entitled to rely on the 'plan, monitor and manage' approach and accept the council's broad supply figures, using monitoring to justify future land releases.

Court Disposition

Application refused

Orders

  • Claimant to pay the first defendant’s costs of the application on the standard basis, such costs if not agreed to be subject to detailed assessment.
  • Order for costs in the sum of £5,539.25 made against the claimant.