Bounces Properties Limited v Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities & Anor.

Bounces Properties Limited v Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities & Anor.

The Inspector's decision was procedurally unfair because the applicant was not given an opportunity to address the Inspector's concern about the effect of obscure glass on natural light, a point not raised by the local authority or in the evidence. This procedural unfairness materially prejudiced the applicant and rendered the decision unlawful.

Parties
Claimant: Bounces Properties Limited; First Defendant: Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities; Second Defendant: London Borough of Enfield
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
30 March 2023
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (planning) / Judgment After Substantive Hearing
Outcome
Decision quashed
Legal Topics
Prior Approval Procedure, Procedural Fairness, Natural Light Requirements, Inspector's Decision Making, Material Considerations
Planning Law Administrative Law Prior Approval Procedure Procedural Fairness Natural Light Requirements Inspector's Decision Making Material Considerations

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 15 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bounces Properties Limited

Claimant

Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities

First Defendant

London Borough of Enfield

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review (planning) / Judgment After Substantive Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Inspector's decision to dismiss the appeal for prior approval was procedurally unfair
  2. 2 Whether the Inspector erred in law by considering privacy as a factor in assessing natural light
  3. 3 Whether the Inspector failed to consider material evidence regarding light transmittance of obscure glass

Ratio Decidendi

The Inspector's decision was procedurally unfair because the applicant was not given an opportunity to address the Inspector's concern about the effect of obscure glass on natural light, a point not raised by the local authority or in the evidence. This procedural unfairness materially prejudiced the applicant and rendered the decision unlawful.

Court Disposition

Decision quashed

Orders

  • The Inspector's decision is quashed on the ground of procedural unfairness.