Campaign To Protect Rural England, R (On the Application Of) v

Campaign To Protect Rural England, R (On the Application Of) v

The POPG did not create binding procedural requirements or legitimate expectations enforceable in law; the Defendant’s consideration of material factors such as landscape value and ecology was rational and adequate; no procedural unfairness or breach of disclosure obligations occurred as confidential economic information was lawfully withheld.

Parties
Claimant: Campaign To Protect Rural England; Defendant: Herefordshire Council; Interested Party: Withers Fruit Farm Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 December 2019
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Final Judgment After Substantive Hearing
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Legitimate Expectation, Procedural Fairness, Material Considerations in Planning, Disclosure of Documents, Environmental Impact Assessment
Administrative Law Planning Law Legitimate Expectation Procedural Fairness Material Considerations in Planning Disclosure of Documents Environmental Impact Assessment

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 19 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Campaign To Protect Rural England

Claimant

Herefordshire Council

Defendant

Withers Fruit Farm Limited

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Final Judgment After Substantive Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Defendant failed to attribute proper weight to the Polytunnels Planning Guide (POPG) or breached a legitimate expectation arising from it
  2. 2 Whether the Defendant failed to take into account material considerations, specifically the value of the landscape and the presence of bats
  3. 3 Whether there was procedural unfairness due to late publication of documents and failure to disclose economic information

Ratio Decidendi

The POPG did not create binding procedural requirements or legitimate expectations enforceable in law; the Defendant’s consideration of material factors such as landscape value and ecology was rational and adequate; no procedural unfairness or breach of disclosure obligations occurred as confidential economic information was lawfully withheld.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed