Warners Retail (Moreton) Ltd v Cotswold District Council [2014] EWHC 2504 (Admin) (22 July 2014)

The Council did not err in its application of the sequential test or in its assessment of town centre vitality and viability; the Budgens site was properly considered, and the Council's planning judgment on impact and linked trips was not irrational or materially misleading.

Citation: [2014] EWHC 2504 (Admin)
Parties: Claimant: Warners Retail (Moreton) Limited; Defendant: Cotswold District Council; Interested Party: Minton Health Care Ltd & Glamar Leisure Limited; Interested Party: Sainsbury's Supermarkets Ltd
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 22 July 2014
Procedural Posture: Judicial Review / Final Judgment After Substantive Hearing
Outcome: Claim dismissed
Legal Topics: Sequential Test, Town Centre Vitality and Viability, Planning Permission, Retail Impact Assessment, Interpretation of National and Local Planning Policy

Planning Law Administrative Law Judicial Review Sequential Test Town Centre Vitality and Viability Planning Permission Retail Impact Assessment Interpretation of National and Local Planning Policy

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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 17

Parties

Warners Retail (Moreton) Limited

Claimant

Cotswold District Council

Defendant

Minton Health Care Ltd & Glamar Leisure Limited

Interested Party

Sainsbury's Supermarkets Ltd

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Final Judgment After Substantive Hearing

Legal Issues

1 Whether the Council misapplied the sequential test in granting planning permission for a new food store
2 Whether the Council failed to properly assess the impact on town centre vitality and viability, including linked trips and the effect on the existing Budgens store

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed