Turner v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & Anor

Turner v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & Anor

The Inspector did not err in law; the concept of 'openness of the Green Belt' in the NPPF includes both spatial and visual aspects, and the Inspector was entitled to consider the difference between permanent structures and moveable chattels, as well as visual intrusion, in assessing the impact of the proposed development. The appeal is dismissed.

Parties
Appellant: John Turner; 1st Respondent: Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government; 2nd Respondent: East Dorset Council
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 May 2016
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment Dismissing Application to Quash Planning Inspector's Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Green Belt Policy, National Planning Policy Framework (nppf), Interpretation of 'openness' in Green Belt, Section 288 Town and Country Planning Act 1990
Planning Law Administrative Law Green Belt Policy National Planning Policy Framework (nppf) Interpretation of 'openness' in Green Belt Section 288 Town and Country Planning Act 1990

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 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

John Turner

Appellant

Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government

1st Respondent

East Dorset Council

2nd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment Dismissing Application to Quash Planning Inspector's Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Planning Inspector erred in interpreting and applying paragraph 89 of the NPPF regarding inappropriate development in the Green Belt
  2. 2 Whether the Inspector wrongly conflated openness with visual impact in assessing the proposed development

Ratio Decidendi

The Inspector did not err in law; the concept of 'openness of the Green Belt' in the NPPF includes both spatial and visual aspects, and the Inspector was entitled to consider the difference between permanent structures and moveable chattels, as well as visual intrusion, in assessing the impact of the proposed development. The appeal is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed