CK Properties (Theydon Bois) Ltd, R (On the Application Of) v Epping Forest District Council

CK Properties (Theydon Bois) Ltd, R (On the Application Of) v Epping Forest District Council

Section 113(2) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 does not preclude judicial review of preparatory steps prior to adoption of a local plan. The Council complied with its Statement of Community Involvement by making supporting studies available when finalised. The Council's decision was based on sufficient evidence and was not procedurally unfair. Any procedural shortcomings can be remedied during the independent examination process, and the Claimant suffered no prejudice.

Parties
Claimant: CK Properties (Theydon Bois) Limited; Defendant: Epping Forest District Council
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
29 June 2018
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Final Judgment
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Local Plan Preparation, Statutory Interpretation, Procedural Fairness, Community Involvement, Regulatory Compliance

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 5 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

CK Properties (Theydon Bois) Limited

Claimant

Epping Forest District Council

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Final Judgment

  1. 1 Whether section 113(2) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 ousts the court's jurisdiction to hear the claim
  2. 2 Whether the Council failed to comply with its Statement of Community Involvement
  3. 3 Whether the Council breached Regulation 19 of the Town and Country Planning (Local Planning) (England) Regulations 2012

Ratio Decidendi

Section 113(2) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 does not preclude judicial review of preparatory steps prior to adoption of a local plan. The Council complied with its Statement of Community Involvement by making supporting studies available when finalised. The Council's decision was based on sufficient evidence and was not procedurally unfair. Any procedural shortcomings can be remedied during the independent examination process, and the Claimant suffered no prejudice.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed