Coventry Gliding Club Ltd, R (On the Application Of) v Harborough District Council [2020] EWHC 3388 (Admin) (11 December 2020)

Coventry Gliding Club Ltd, R (On the Application Of) v Harborough District Council [2020] EWHC 3388 (Admin) (11 December 2020)

The Council's failure to notify the applicant of its decision within the prescribed period under the GPDO rendered the right to develop unconditional; a quashing order would serve no practical purpose; paragraph W(11) is not incompatible with Convention rights; no injunction is available to prevent the development; the costs order stands; the question of damages is deferred pending proper pleading.

Citation
[2020] EWHC 3388 (Admin)
Parties
Claimant: Coventry Gliding Club Limited; Defendant: Harborough District Council; Interested Party: G & P Garner and Sons; Intervener: Secretary of State for Housing Communities & Local Government
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 December 2020
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Remedies Hearing Following Liability Judgment
Outcome
Declaration granted; all other relief refused or deferred
Legal Topics
Prior Approval Under GPDO, Notification Requirements, Compatibility With ECHR, Costs Orders, Injunctions, Damages for Breach of Convention Rights
Administrative Law Planning Law Human Rights Prior Approval Under GPDO Notification Requirements Compatibility With ECHR Costs Orders Injunctions +1 more

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 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Coventry Gliding Club Limited

Claimant

Harborough District Council

Defendant

G & P Garner and Sons

Interested Party

Secretary of State for Housing Communities & Local Government

Intervener

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Remedies Hearing Following Liability Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Council's decision should be quashed
  2. 2 Whether paragraph W(11) of the GPDO is incompatible with Convention rights
  3. 3 Whether an injunction should be granted to prevent development

Ratio Decidendi

The Council's failure to notify the applicant of its decision within the prescribed period under the GPDO rendered the right to develop unconditional; a quashing order would serve no practical purpose; paragraph W(11) is not incompatible with Convention rights; no injunction is available to prevent the development; the costs order stands; the question of damages is deferred pending proper pleading.

Court Disposition

Declaration granted; all other relief refused or deferred

Orders

  • Declaration that the Council's decision of 28 February 2019 was unlawful
  • No quashing order made