Carroll v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & Ors

Carroll v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & Ors

The Inspector acted unlawfully by failing to give the Claimant an opportunity to comment on the material change in the basis of the appeal from B1 to B8 use, amending the description of development without consultation, and failing to consider material considerations, including the recent refusal of a similar planning application and Strategic Objective CO2. Substantial prejudice was caused to the Claimant, and the decision must be quashed.

Parties
Claimant: Niall Carroll; First Defendant: Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government; Second Defendant: Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea; Third Defendant: Zipporah Lisle-Mainwaring
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 February 2015
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (planning) / Judgment on Application to Quash Planning Decision
Outcome
Application allowed; Inspector's decision quashed.
Legal Topics
Procedural Fairness, Planning Permission, Change of Use, Material Considerations, Written Representations Procedure
Administrative Law Planning Law Procedural Fairness Planning Permission Change of Use Material Considerations Written Representations Procedure

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 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Niall Carroll

Claimant

Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government

First Defendant

Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea

Second Defendant

Zipporah Lisle-Mainwaring

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review (planning) / Judgment on Application to Quash Planning Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Inspector acted unlawfully by failing to allow the Claimant to comment on a material change in the basis of the planning appeal (from B1 to B8 use)
  2. 2 Whether the Inspector unlawfully amended the description of development without consultation
  3. 3 Whether the Inspector failed to consider material considerations, including a recent refusal of a similar planning application and Strategic Objective CO2

Ratio Decidendi

The Inspector acted unlawfully by failing to give the Claimant an opportunity to comment on the material change in the basis of the appeal from B1 to B8 use, amending the description of development without consultation, and failing to consider material considerations, including the recent refusal of a similar planning application and Strategic Objective CO2. Substantial prejudice was caused to the Claimant, and the decision must be quashed.

Court Disposition

Application allowed; Inspector's decision quashed.

Orders

  • The decision of the Inspector dated 9 July 2014 is quashed.