Geoffrey Simmonds, R (on the application of Geoffrey Simmonds) v Blaby District Council & Ors

Geoffrey Simmonds, R (on the application of Geoffrey Simmonds) v Blaby District Council & Ors

The Council's decisions were materially flawed due to significant procedural unfairness: Councillor Moitt was misled by erroneous advice and excluded from participation, and the Committee was not properly advised regarding NPPF paragraph 196 on deliberate neglect. These errors justified setting aside the planning permission and listed building consent.

Parties
Claimant: Geoffrey Simmonds; Defendant: Blaby District Council; Interested Party: Venture Properties Group; Interested Party: EMH Housing and Regeneration Limited; Interested Party: Jessup Brothers Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 October 2024
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Final Judgment After Oral Hearing
Outcome
Claim allowed in part; planning permission and listed building consent set aside.
Legal Topics
Listed Building Consent, Planning Permission, Conservation Areas, Judicial Review, Procedural Fairness
Planning Law Administrative Law Heritage Law Listed Building Consent Planning Permission Conservation Areas Judicial Review Procedural Fairness

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

Geoffrey Simmonds

Claimant

Blaby District Council

Defendant

Venture Properties Group

Interested Party

EMH Housing and Regeneration Limited

Interested Party

Jessup Brothers Limited

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Final Judgment After Oral Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Planning Committee was misled by officers' reports omitting reference to NPPF paragraph 196 regarding deliberate neglect of heritage assets
  2. 2 Whether section 66(1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 was properly applied
  3. 3 Whether advice to disregard an emerging Conservation Area was lawful

Ratio Decidendi

The Council's decisions were materially flawed due to significant procedural unfairness: Councillor Moitt was misled by erroneous advice and excluded from participation, and the Committee was not properly advised regarding NPPF paragraph 196 on deliberate neglect. These errors justified setting aside the planning permission and listed building consent.

Court Disposition

Claim allowed in part; planning permission and listed building consent set aside.

Orders

  • Planning permission and listed building consent for demolition of the milking shed are quashed.
  • Order in terms of the minute agreed by the parties.