Westminster City Council v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & Anor

Westminster City Council v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & Anor

The Inspector erred in law by taking into account a unilateral undertaking as a section 106 planning obligation when it was not valid under the statute, and failed to identify exceptional reasons required by policy TRANS23 to justify the loss of off-street parking, thus misapplying the policy and failing to provide adequate reasons.

Parties
Claimant: Westminster City Council; First Defendant: Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government; Second Defendant: Mrs. Marilyn Acons
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 March 2013
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Judgment
Outcome
Application allowed; decision quashed
Legal Topics
Section 106 Planning Obligations, Planning Permission, Local Authority Policy, Judicial Review, Reasons for Decisions
Planning Law Administrative Law Section 106 Planning Obligations Planning Permission Local Authority Policy Judicial Review Reasons for Decisions

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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Westminster City Council

Claimant

Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government

First Defendant

Mrs. Marilyn Acons

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Inspector erred in law by taking into account an invalid section 106 unilateral undertaking as a planning obligation.
  2. 2 Whether the Inspector failed to provide adequate reasons for granting planning permission contrary to local policy TRANS23.

Ratio Decidendi

The Inspector erred in law by taking into account a unilateral undertaking as a section 106 planning obligation when it was not valid under the statute, and failed to identify exceptional reasons required by policy TRANS23 to justify the loss of off-street parking, thus misapplying the policy and failing to provide adequate reasons.

Court Disposition

Application allowed; decision quashed

Orders

  • The decision of the Inspector dated 31st October 2011 is quashed.