Pagham Parish Council v Arun District Council

Pagham Parish Council v Arun District Council

The planning officer's report rationally concluded that the development would preserve the setting of listed buildings, including the Church, and properly directed the Committee to its legal duties under s.66(1) and the NPPF. There was no material misleading of the Committee, and no legal obligation to specifically engage with or explain rejection of the applicant's consultant's views. Accordingly, the Local Planning Authority discharged its statutory duty and the claim for judicial review must fail.

Parties
Claimant: Pagham Parish Council; Defendant: Arun District Council; Interested Party: Claudia Langmead; Interested Party: James Smith (Planning Law Services) Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
04 July 2019
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Final Judgment
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Listed Buildings, Conservation Areas, Judicial Review, Planning Permission, Heritage Impact Assessment
Planning Law Administrative Law Heritage Law Listed Buildings Conservation Areas Judicial Review Planning Permission Heritage Impact Assessment

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

Interested Party

James Smith (Planning Law Services) Ltd

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Local Planning Authority failed to discharge 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 rationally concluded that the development would preserve the setting of listed buildings, including the Church, and properly directed the Committee to its legal duties under s.66(1) and the NPPF. There was no material misleading of the Committee, and no legal obligation to specifically engage with or explain rejection of the applicant's consultant's views. Accordingly, the Local Planning Authority discharged its statutory duty and the claim for judicial review must fail.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed