Aspdin, R (on the application of) v Derby City Council [2005] EWHC 591 (Admin) (22 March 2005)

Aspdin, R (on the application of) v Derby City Council [2005] EWHC 591 (Admin) (22 March 2005)

Although there was a procedural failure in not providing the colour photograph to committee members at the first meeting, no substantial prejudice resulted because the committee later reconsidered the matter with the photograph available and reached the same decision. The order was regular on its face, and the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2005] EWHC 591 (Admin)
Parties
Claimant: Aspdin; Defendant: Derby City Council
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
22 March 2005
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (section 288 Challenge) / Final Judgment
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Tree Preservation Orders, Procedural Fairness, Local Government Procedure, Costs Orders
Administrative Law Planning Law Tree Preservation Orders Procedural Fairness Local Government Procedure Costs Orders

Source-derived case record

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Aspdin

Claimant

Derby City Council

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review (section 288 Challenge) / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether failure to provide a colour photograph to committee members constituted a procedural defect justifying quashing of a tree preservation order
  2. 2 Whether the order was invalid due to alleged irregularity in affixing the council's seal

Ratio Decidendi

Although there was a procedural failure in not providing the colour photograph to committee members at the first meeting, no substantial prejudice resulted because the committee later reconsidered the matter with the photograph available and reached the same decision. The order was regular on its face, and the presumption of regularity was not rebutted regarding the affixing of the council's seal. The challenge was therefore dismissed.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed

Orders

  • Claimant to pay defendant's costs, summarily assessed at £3,237.38, within 14 days