Pagham Parish Council v Arun District Council [2019] EWHC 1721 (Admin) (04 July 2019)

Pagham Parish Council v Arun District Council [2019] EWHC 1721 (Admin) (04 July 2019)

The planning officer's report properly directed the Committee to the relevant statutory duty under s.66(1) and the NPPF heritage provisions, and there was no material misrepresentation or omission regarding the views of Historic England or the Heritage Impact Assessment. The assessment of harm was a matter of planning judgment, and the Committee was entitled to accept the officer's conclusion that the setting of the listed church would be preserved. There was no legal error or procedural unfairness.

Citation
[2019] EWHC 1721 (Admin)
Parties
Claimant: Pagham Parish Council; Defendant: Arun District Council; Interested Parties: Claudia Langmead (and seven others)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
04 July 2019
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / High Court Judgment
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Listed Buildings, Planning Permission, Judicial Review, Heritage Assets, Section 66(1) Duty, National Planning Policy Framework (nppf), Planning Officer Reports
Planning Law Administrative Law Heritage Law Listed Buildings Planning Permission Judicial Review Heritage Assets Section 66(1) Duty +2 more

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 14 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Pagham Parish Council

Claimant

Arun District Council

Defendant

Claudia Langmead (and seven others)

Interested Parties

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / High Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the planning authority failed to have regard to its duty under s.66(1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990
  2. 2 Whether the planning officer materially misled the committee by inadequately summarising the views of Historic England

Ratio Decidendi

The planning officer's report properly directed the Committee to the relevant statutory duty under s.66(1) and the NPPF heritage provisions, and there was no material misrepresentation or omission regarding the views of Historic England or the Heritage Impact Assessment. The assessment of harm was a matter of planning judgment, and the Committee was entitled to accept the officer's conclusion that the setting of the listed church would be preserved. There was no legal error or procedural unfairness.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed