Ashwell Property Group Plc and Ashwell (Barton Road) Ltd v Cambridge City Council [2007] EWHC 1753 (Admin) (20 July 2007)

Ashwell Property Group Plc and Ashwell (Barton Road) Ltd v Cambridge City Council [2007] EWHC 1753 (Admin) (20 July 2007)

The Council and Inspector lawfully discharged the requirements of Policy 24 of RPG6 through the Structure Plan process, which constituted the necessary Green Belt review; any further release of Green Belt land required demonstration of exceptional circumstances, which Ashwell failed to establish. There was no misapplication of the legal test or error of law in the adoption of the Local Plan.

Citation
[2007] EWHC 1753 (Admin)
Parties
Claimant: Ashwell Property Group PLC and Ashwell (Barton Road) Limited; Defendant: Cambridge City Council
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 July 2007
Procedural Posture
Section 287 Application Under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 / High Court Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Local Plan Adoption, Green Belt Policy, Judicial Review, Statutory Interpretation
Planning Law Administrative Law Local Government Law Local Plan Adoption Green Belt Policy Judicial Review 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 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ashwell Property Group PLC and Ashwell (Barton Road) Limited

Claimant

Cambridge City Council

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Section 287 Application Under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 / High Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Council and Inspector misapplied Policy 24 of RPG6 in refusing to release the Barton Road North site from the Cambridge Green Belt
  2. 2 Whether the Inspector applied the correct legal test for Green Belt release under Policy 24 of RPG6
  3. 3 Whether the Council's adoption of the Local Plan was unlawful due to procedural or substantive error

Ratio Decidendi

The Council and Inspector lawfully discharged the requirements of Policy 24 of RPG6 through the Structure Plan process, which constituted the necessary Green Belt review; any further release of Green Belt land required demonstration of exceptional circumstances, which Ashwell failed to establish. There was no misapplication of the legal test or error of law in the adoption of the Local Plan.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed