Mikael Armstrong v Secretary of State for Levelling-Up, Housing and Communities & Anor.

Mikael Armstrong v Secretary of State for Levelling-Up, Housing and Communities & Anor.

Section 73 TCPA 1990 is not restricted to 'minor material amendments' or non-fundamental variations; provided the application does not conflict with the operative part of the permission, it falls within section 73. The Inspector erred in law by misdirecting himself to restrict section 73 to minor material amendments based on Planning Practice Guidance, which is not statutory.

Parties
Claimant: Mikael Armstrong; First Defendant: Secretary of State for Levelling-Up, Housing and Communities; Second Defendant: Cornwall Council
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 January 2023
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Final Judgment
Outcome
Claim allowed; Inspector's decision quashed
Legal Topics
Statutory Interpretation, Variation of Planning Conditions, Section 73 TCPA 1990, Section 96 a TCPA 1990, Planning Practice Guidance, Judicial Review
Planning Law Administrative Law Statutory Interpretation Variation of Planning Conditions Section 73 TCPA 1990 Section 96 a TCPA 1990 Planning Practice Guidance Judicial Review

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 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mikael Armstrong

Claimant

Secretary of State for Levelling-Up, Housing and Communities

First Defendant

Cornwall Council

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether section 73 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 permits fundamental variations to planning conditions where there is no conflict with the operative part of the permission
  2. 2 Whether the Planning Inspector lawfully dismissed the appeal based on the scope of section 73 TCPA 1990

Ratio Decidendi

Section 73 TCPA 1990 is not restricted to 'minor material amendments' or non-fundamental variations; provided the application does not conflict with the operative part of the permission, it falls within section 73. The Inspector erred in law by misdirecting himself to restrict section 73 to minor material amendments based on Planning Practice Guidance, which is not statutory.

Court Disposition

Claim allowed; Inspector's decision quashed

Orders

  • The Inspector's decision is quashed
  • The section 73 application must be reconsidered in accordance with the correct legal test