Cash v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & Anor [2012] EWHC 2908 (Admin) (22 October 2012)

Cash v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & Anor [2012] EWHC 2908 (Admin) (22 October 2012)

The inspector's decisions on enforcement notices and refusal of planning permission were not legally flawed or Wednesbury unreasonable. Service of the second enforcement notice on occupiers was technically defective but caused no substantial prejudice. The inspector's assessments of flood risk, ecological harm,...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2012] EWHC 2908 (Admin)
Parties
Appellant: Felix Cash; First Respondent: Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government; Second Respondent: Wokingham District Council
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
22 October 2012
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review and Statutory Appeal (planning) / High Court Judgment on Applications Under Sections 288 and 289 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990
Outcome
Applications dismissed
Legal Topics
Enforcement Notice Service Requirements, Planning Permission Appeals, Flood Risk Assessment in Planning, Ecological Harm in Planning, Temporary Planning Permission, Affordable Housing Definition, Permitted Development Rights
Administrative Law Planning Law Enforcement Notice Service Requirements Planning Permission Appeals Flood Risk Assessment in Planning Ecological Harm in Planning Temporary Planning Permission Affordable Housing Definition +1 more

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 4 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Felix Cash

Appellant

Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government

First Respondent

Wokingham District Council

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review and Statutory Appeal (planning) / High Court Judgment on Applications Under Sections 288 and 289 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the inspector erred in law in upholding enforcement notices and refusing planning permission
  2. 2 Whether service of the second enforcement notice on occupiers was legally sufficient
  3. 3 Whether the inspector's assessment of flood risk and ecological harm was flawed

Ratio Decidendi

The inspector's decisions on enforcement notices and refusal of planning permission were not legally flawed or Wednesbury unreasonable. Service of the second enforcement notice on occupiers was technically defective but caused no substantial prejudice. The inspector's assessments of flood risk, ecological harm, temporary permission, affordable housing, and the fence were matters of planning judgment and not open to review.

Court Disposition

Applications dismissed

Orders

  • Leave to appeal refused on all grounds
  • Application under section 288 dismissed