Chalfont St Peter Parish Council, R (On the Application Of) v Chiltern District Council [2013] EWHC 1877 (Admin) (03 July 2013)

Chalfont St Peter Parish Council, R (On the Application Of) v Chiltern District Council [2013] EWHC 1877 (Admin) (03 July 2013)

The Defendant was entitled to treat the land swap proposal as not deliverable and therefore not a reasonable alternative requiring sustainability appraisal. The statutory requirements for sustainability appraisal and consideration of alternatives were met. The Inspector's reasoning was adequate and lawful. The challenge to policy CS6 fails.

Citation
[2013] EWHC 1877 (Admin)
Parties
Claimant: Chalfont St Peter Parish Council; Defendant: Chiltern District Council
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
03 July 2013
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Final Judgment After Substantive Hearing
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Strategic Environmental Assessment, Sustainability Appraisal, Development Plan Documents, Reasonableness of Alternatives, Inspector's Reasons, Deliverability of Planning Proposals
Administrative Law Planning Law Environmental Law Strategic Environmental Assessment Sustainability Appraisal Development Plan Documents Reasonableness of Alternatives Inspector's Reasons +1 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 3 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Chalfont St Peter Parish Council

Claimant

Chiltern District Council

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Final Judgment After Substantive Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Defendant failed to provide an adequate strategic environmental assessment or sustainability appraisal for the site allocation and alternatives
  2. 2 Whether the Inspector reached unlawful conclusions and failed to provide adequate reasons

Ratio Decidendi

The Defendant was entitled to treat the land swap proposal as not deliverable and therefore not a reasonable alternative requiring sustainability appraisal. The statutory requirements for sustainability appraisal and consideration of alternatives were met. The Inspector's reasoning was adequate and lawful. The challenge to policy CS6 fails.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed