Dignity Funerals Ltd v Breckland District Council

Dignity Funerals Ltd v Breckland District Council

The planning authority properly interpreted and applied the relevant development plan policies, was not legally obliged to consider the Weeting site as an alternative due to insufficient information and absence of statutory or policy requirement, and exercised rational planning judgment in all respects. The grounds of challenge fail.

Parties
Claimant: Dignity Funerals Limited; Defendant: Breckland District Council; Interested Party: Thornalley Funeral Services Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 June 2017
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Final Judgment
Outcome
Application for judicial review dismissed.
Legal Topics
Development Plan Interpretation, Alternative Sites, Sustainable Development, Judicial Review, Planning Permission, Statutory Interpretation
Planning Law Administrative Law Development Plan Interpretation Alternative Sites Sustainable Development Judicial Review Planning Permission Statutory Interpretation

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 6 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dignity Funerals Limited

Claimant

Breckland District Council

Defendant

Thornalley Funeral Services Limited

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the planning authority misinterpreted policy SS1 of the Core Strategy
  2. 2 Whether the authority was obliged to consider alternative sites, specifically the Weeting site
  3. 3 Whether the authority misapplied or inconsistently applied other relevant policies (CP11, DC16, CP13, DC12, NPPF paragraphs 109 and 118)

Ratio Decidendi

The planning authority properly interpreted and applied the relevant development plan policies, was not legally obliged to consider the Weeting site as an alternative due to insufficient information and absence of statutory or policy requirement, and exercised rational planning judgment in all respects. The grounds of challenge fail.

Court Disposition

Application for judicial review dismissed.

Orders

  • Claim dismissed.
  • Claimant to pay Defendant's costs assessed at £34,000.