Palmer, R (on the application of) v Davenport (t/a Foxley Estate) & Ors

Palmer, R (on the application of) v Davenport (t/a Foxley Estate) & Ors

The council's acceptance of the Environmental Statement and its approach to drainage, flood risk, and other environmental impacts was not irrational or unlawful. The council considered all material considerations, either directly or by imposing appropriate conditions. The failure to publish the Council Drainage Report did not cause prejudice. The environmental effects of manure spreading and non-visual impacts on the listed building were considered and addressed within the council's planning judgment. Landscaping conditions and the treatment of the claimant's fears and agricultural land classification were matters of planning judgment and not unlawful. No grounds for quashing the planning...

Parties
Claimant: David Palmer; Defendant: Herefordshire Council; Interested Party: James Davenport (t/a Foxley Estate); Interested Party: DJ and IR Powell
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
25 September 2015
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Judgment on Application for Permission and Substantive Hearing
Outcome
Claim dismissed; permission refused on all but two grounds, which ultimately failed.
Legal Topics
Environmental Impact Assessment, Planning Permission, Listed Buildings, Judicial Review, Public Law, Local Government Procedure
Planning Law Administrative Law Environmental Law Environmental Impact Assessment Planning Permission Listed Buildings Judicial Review Public Law +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 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

David Palmer

Claimant

Herefordshire Council

Defendant

James Davenport (t/a Foxley Estate)

Interested Party

DJ and IR Powell

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Judgment on Application for Permission and Substantive Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Environmental Statement was adequate under the EIA Regulations
  2. 2 Whether the council failed to consider material considerations regarding flood risk and drainage
  3. 3 Whether failure to publish the Council Drainage Report invalidated the decision

Ratio Decidendi

The council's acceptance of the Environmental Statement and its approach to drainage, flood risk, and other environmental impacts was not irrational or unlawful. The council considered all material considerations, either directly or by imposing appropriate conditions. The failure to publish the Council Drainage Report did not cause prejudice. The environmental effects of manure spreading and non-visual impacts on the listed building were considered and addressed within the council's planning judgment. Landscaping conditions and the treatment of the claimant's fears and agricultural land classification were matters of planning judgment and not unlawful. No grounds for quashing the planning...

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed; permission refused on all but two grounds, which ultimately failed.