Eastleigh Borough Council v Secretary of State for Housing Communities and Local Government & Ors

Eastleigh Borough Council v Secretary of State for Housing Communities and Local Government & Ors

The Inspector did not err in law in his interpretation or application of Policy 100.T, as a safe walking route existed, and the weight to be attached to development plan policies and the planning balance were matters of planning judgment not irrationality; the review is dismissed.

Parties
Claimant: Eastleigh Borough Council; 1st Defendant: Secretary of State for Housing Communities and Local Government; 2nd Defendant: Mr Robert Janaway; 3rd Defendant: Mr Simon Bull
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 July 2019
Procedural Posture
Statutory Review (planning) / Judgment After Full Hearing
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Statutory Review, Planning Permission, Development Plan Policies, National Planning Policy Framework (nppf), Housing Land Supply, Judicial Review Standards
Planning Law Administrative Law Statutory Review Planning Permission Development Plan Policies National Planning Policy Framework (nppf) Housing Land Supply Judicial Review Standards

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 5 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Eastleigh Borough Council

Claimant

Secretary of State for Housing Communities and Local Government

1st Defendant

Mr Robert Janaway

2nd Defendant

Mr Simon Bull

3rd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Statutory Review (planning) / Judgment After Full Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Planning Inspector erred in law in finding compliance with Policy 100.T regarding sustainable transport (walking)
  2. 2 Whether the Inspector erred in the planning balance between housing land supply and breach of countryside policies

Ratio Decidendi

The Inspector did not err in law in his interpretation or application of Policy 100.T, as a safe walking route existed, and the weight to be attached to development plan policies and the planning balance were matters of planning judgment not irrationality; the review is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed