Hayter v First Secretary of State & Anor [2003] EWHC 258 (Admin) (21 February 2003)

Hayter v First Secretary of State & Anor [2003] EWHC 258 (Admin) (21 February 2003)

The appeal site was outside the development inset, so countryside policies applied and Policy H2 did not. The inspector's decision involved no error of law. Late service of costs schedule did not justify depriving the defendant of costs; costs claimed were reasonable except for a reduction in time spent on documents.

Citation
[2003] EWHC 258 (Admin)
Parties
Claimant: John Charles Hayter; First Defendant: First Secretary of State; Second Defendant: Winchester City Council
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 February 2003
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (planning Appeal) / Final Judgment and Costs Assessment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Planning Permission, Local Development Plans, Costs Assessment
Administrative Law Planning Law Planning Permission Local Development Plans Costs Assessment

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

John Charles Hayter

Claimant

First Secretary of State

First Defendant

Winchester City Council

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review (planning Appeal) / Final Judgment and Costs Assessment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the inspector erred in law in dismissing the claimant's appeal against refusal of planning permission
  2. 2 Whether countryside policies applied to the appeal site
  3. 3 Whether late service of costs schedule should affect costs order

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal site was outside the development inset, so countryside policies applied and Policy H2 did not. The inspector's decision involved no error of law. Late service of costs schedule did not justify depriving the defendant of costs; costs claimed were reasonable except for a reduction in time spent on documents.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Claimant to pay First Defendant's costs assessed at £3,679.25