BDW Trading Ltd (t/as David Wilson Homes (Central, Mercia and West Midlands)) v The Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & Anor

BDW Trading Ltd (t/as David Wilson Homes (Central, Mercia and West Midlands)) v The Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & Anor

The Inspector erred in law by failing to expressly determine whether the development accorded with the development plan as a whole, which was material to the statutory presumption and outcome; the error was not merely formal but substantive, and the decision must be quashed.

Parties
Claimant: BDW Trading Limited (trading as David Wilson Homes (Central, Mercia and West Midlands)); First Defendant: Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government; Second Defendant: Stafford Borough Council
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
01 April 2015
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (statutory Appeal Under Section 288 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990) / Judgment on Application to Quash Planning Decision
Outcome
Application allowed; Inspector's decision quashed.
Legal Topics
Statutory Interpretation, Development Plan Compliance, Presumption in Favour of Sustainable Development, Planning Policy, Reasoning Adequacy, Planning Conditions

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 8 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

BDW Trading Limited (trading as David Wilson Homes (Central, Mercia and West Midlands))

Claimant

Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government

First Defendant

Stafford Borough Council

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review (statutory Appeal Under Section 288 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990) / Judgment on Application to Quash Planning Decision

  1. 1 Whether the Inspector failed to determine if the development accorded with the development plan as a whole
  2. 2 Whether the presumption in favour of sustainable development was misapplied
  3. 3 Whether adequate reasons were given for finding harm to residential amenity

Ratio Decidendi

The Inspector erred in law by failing to expressly determine whether the development accorded with the development plan as a whole, which was material to the statutory presumption and outcome; the error was not merely formal but substantive, and the decision must be quashed.

Court Disposition

Application allowed; Inspector's decision quashed.

Orders

  • The Inspector’s decision of 24 October 2014 is quashed.