Searle & Anor v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & Anor [2012] EWHC 2269 (Admin) (16 August 2012)

Searle & Anor v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & Anor [2012] EWHC 2269 (Admin) (16 August 2012)

The Secretary of State was entitled to give less weight to Circular 01/2006 due to his intention to revoke it; the adequacy of reasons was sufficient; the decision not to conduct a site visit was a matter of judgment and not unreasonable; and the parties had the opportunity to address the issues regarding temporary permission. No error of law was established.

Citation
[2012] EWHC 2269 (Admin)
Parties
Claimant: Jimmy Searle; Claimant: Christopher Searle; First Defendant: Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government; Second Defendant: Chichester District Council
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 August 2012
Procedural Posture
Appeal Under S 289 Town and Country Planning Act 1990 / Judgment After Hearing
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Planning Permission, Enforcement Notice, Material Considerations, Temporary Planning Permission, Gypsy and Traveller Sites, National Parks, Judicial Review, Reasoning and Adequacy of Reasons
Administrative Law Planning Law Human Rights Planning Permission Enforcement Notice Material Considerations Temporary Planning Permission Gypsy and Traveller Sites +3 more

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 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jimmy Searle

Claimant

Christopher Searle

Claimant

Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government

First Defendant

Chichester District Council

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Appeal Under S 289 Town and Country Planning Act 1990 / Judgment After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Secretary of State erred in law by giving less weight to Circular 01/2006 due to intention to revoke it
  2. 2 Whether the Secretary of State departed from the Inspector's assessment of harm to the area without a site visit
  3. 3 Whether the Secretary of State relied on a different reason for rejecting temporary planning permission without giving the Claimants a chance to respond

Ratio Decidendi

The Secretary of State was entitled to give less weight to Circular 01/2006 due to his intention to revoke it; the adequacy of reasons was sufficient; the decision not to conduct a site visit was a matter of judgment and not unreasonable; and the parties had the opportunity to address the issues regarding temporary permission. No error of law was established.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed