Mansell vTonbridge And Malling Borough Council
The council lawfully interpreted and applied Class Q, properly assessed the fallback position as realistic, and did not misapply the presumption in favour of sustainable development; no material error of law occurred.
- Parties
- Appellant: Michael Mansell; Respondent: Tonbridge and Malling Borough Council; Interested Party: Croudace Portland; Interested Party: The East Malling Trust
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 08 September 2017
- Procedural Posture
- Judicial Review Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Permitted Development Rights, Fallback Position, Sustainable Development, Statutory Interpretation, Material Considerations, Planning Policy, Presumption in Favour of Sustainable Development
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Michael Mansell
Appellant
Tonbridge and Malling Borough Council
Respondent
Croudace Portland
Interested Party
The East Malling Trust
Interested Party
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Interpretation and application of Class Q in the GPDO
- 2 Whether there was a real prospect of fallback development
- 3 Application of the presumption in favour of sustainable development in the NPPF
Ratio Decidendi
The council lawfully interpreted and applied Class Q, properly assessed the fallback position as realistic, and did not misapply the presumption in favour of sustainable development; no material error of law occurred.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed
Orders
- Appeal dismissed; Garnham J.'s order stands
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment