Campaign To Protect Rural England (CPRE), R (On the Application Of) v Dover District Council

Campaign To Protect Rural England (CPRE), R (On the Application Of) v Dover District Council

The planning authority lawfully treated the scheme as a composite development, making the heritage contribution necessary, directly related, and reasonably related in scale and kind; reasons for exceptional circumstances were adequately discernible; housing land supply assessment was properly relied upon; the option agreement for the hotel site was not a material planning consideration.

Parties
Claimant: Campaign to Protect Rural England; Defendant: Dover District Council; Interested Party: China Gateway International (CGI) Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 December 2015
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Final Judgment After Rolled Up Hearing
Outcome
Claim dismissed; permission to amend refused; permission to appeal refused.
Legal Topics
Planning Permission, Section 106 Agreements, Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations, Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty, Judicial Review, Housing Land Supply, State Aid

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 4 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Campaign to Protect Rural England

Claimant

Dover District Council

Defendant

China Gateway International (CGI) Limited

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Final Judgment After Rolled Up Hearing

  1. 1 Lawfulness of £5 million heritage contribution under section 106 agreement
  2. 2 Adequacy of reasons for exceptional circumstances in granting planning permission in an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty
  3. 3 Appropriateness of reliance on housing land supply deficit

Ratio Decidendi

The planning authority lawfully treated the scheme as a composite development, making the heritage contribution necessary, directly related, and reasonably related in scale and kind; reasons for exceptional circumstances were adequately discernible; housing land supply assessment was properly relied upon; the option agreement for the hotel site was not a material planning consideration.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed; permission to amend refused; permission to appeal refused.

Orders

  • Claimants to pay defendant's costs capped at £10,000.
  • No extension of time for appeal beyond usual period unless transcript delayed.