O'Connor v Secretary of State for the Communities and Local Government & Anor [2013] EWCA Civ 263 (07 February 2013)

O'Connor v Secretary of State for the Communities and Local Government & Anor [2013] EWCA Civ 263 (07 February 2013)

The Inspector lawfully performed two separate balancing exercises for permanent and temporary planning permission, considered the relevant policies, and gave substantial weight to the unmet need for gypsy and traveller sites as required. There was no legal error or misdirection in the Inspector's reasoning or application of policy.

Citation
[2013] EWCA Civ 263
Parties
Appellant: O'Connor; Respondents: The Secretary of State for the Communities and Local Government & Anr
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
07 February 2013
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From High Court (administrative Court)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Green Belt Development, Gypsy and Traveller Sites, Temporary Planning Permission, Material Considerations in Planning, Interpretation of Planning Policy, Race Relations in Planning Decisions
Planning Law Administrative Law Human Rights Green Belt Development Gypsy and Traveller Sites Temporary Planning Permission Material Considerations in Planning Interpretation of Planning Policy +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 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

O'Connor

Appellant

The Secretary of State for the Communities and Local Government & Anr

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From High Court (administrative Court)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Planning Inspector erred in law by failing to give 'substantial weight' to unmet need for gypsy and traveller sites when considering temporary planning permission in the Green Belt under Circular 01/2006, paragraph 46.
  2. 2 Whether the Inspector misapplied Circular 11/95 regarding the refusal of temporary planning permission.

Ratio Decidendi

The Inspector lawfully performed two separate balancing exercises for permanent and temporary planning permission, considered the relevant policies, and gave substantial weight to the unmet need for gypsy and traveller sites as required. There was no legal error or misdirection in the Inspector's reasoning or application of policy.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Application refused