Wood v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government

Wood v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government

The inspector misdirected himself by treating the defined village boundary in the Local Plan as determinative, rather than exercising planning judgment based on the position on the ground, thus his decision must be quashed.

Parties
Claimant/appellant: Julian Wood; First Defendant: Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government; Second Defendant/respondent: Gravesham Borough Council
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
09 February 2015
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Appeal From High Court to Court of Appeal
Outcome
appeal allowed; inspector's decision quashed
Legal Topics
Green Belt, Limited Infilling, National Planning Policy Framework, Local Plan Interpretation
Planning Law Administrative Law Green Belt Limited Infilling National Planning Policy Framework Local Plan Interpretation

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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Julian Wood

Claimant/appellant

Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government

First Defendant

Gravesham Borough Council

Second Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Appeal From High Court to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Did the inspector misdirect himself by treating the village boundary as defined in the Local Plan as determinative for 'limited infilling in villages' under NPPF paragraph 89?
  2. 2 Should the inspector's decision be quashed for failure to properly consider the housing land supply shortfall?

Ratio Decidendi

The inspector misdirected himself by treating the defined village boundary in the Local Plan as determinative, rather than exercising planning judgment based on the position on the ground, thus his decision must be quashed.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed; inspector's decision quashed

Orders

  • paragraph 4 of Judge Mackie's order set aside
  • second respondent to pay appellant's costs from 30 January 2014, subject to detailed assessment if not agreed