Doherty, R (on the application of) v First Secretary of State & Anor

Doherty, R (on the application of) v First Secretary of State & Anor

The Secretary of State was entitled to conclude, on the evidence, that the appellant's personal and educational needs did not amount to very special circumstances sufficient to outweigh the substantial planning harm identified, and that the decision letter demonstrated a proper balancing exercise. The appeal was therefore dismissed.

Parties
Appellant: Anthony Doherty; First Respondent: First Secretary of State; Second Respondent: Hertsmere Borough Council
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
29 July 2003
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (planning Enforcement Appeal) / High Court Appeal Under Section 289 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Green Belt Policy, Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation, Enforcement Notice, Temporary Planning Permission, Educational Needs in Planning, Access to Justice Act Costs
Planning Law Administrative Law Green Belt Policy Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation Enforcement Notice Temporary Planning Permission Educational Needs in Planning Access to Justice Act Costs

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

Anthony Doherty

Appellant

First Secretary of State

First Respondent

Hertsmere Borough Council

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review (planning Enforcement Appeal) / High Court Appeal Under Section 289 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Secretary of State failed to give proper weight to the shortage of lawful gypsy sites in Hertfordshire and Hertsmere
  2. 2 Whether the Secretary of State erred in assessing the educational needs of the appellant's children and the availability of alternative sites

Ratio Decidendi

The Secretary of State was entitled to conclude, on the evidence, that the appellant's personal and educational needs did not amount to very special circumstances sufficient to outweigh the substantial planning harm identified, and that the decision letter demonstrated a proper balancing exercise. The appeal was therefore dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Claimant to pay the costs of the first respondent, subject to the normal legal aid order and section 11 of the Access to Justice Act 1989