Woking Borough Council, R (on the application of) v Keenan

Woking Borough Council, R (on the application of) v Keenan

The magistrates' conclusion that no work had taken place on 23rd September 2003 was perverse unless they explicitly rejected the evidence of Mr Travis, which they failed to do or to give adequate reasons for. The magistrates failed to provide sufficient reasoning for their decision, and did not address the issue of causing or permitting contravention under s.187(1B).

Parties
Claimant: Woking Borough Council; Defendant: Patrick James Keenan
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
06 May 2005
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Appeal by Way of Case Stated / Judgment on Appeal From Magistrates' Court
Outcome
Decision of the magistrates quashed; matter remitted for reconsideration by a differently constituted bench.
Legal Topics
Stop Notice, Enforcement Notice, Standard of Proof, Reasons for Decision, Section 187 Town and Country Planning Act 1990
Administrative Law Criminal Law Planning Law Stop Notice Enforcement Notice Standard of Proof Reasons for Decision Section 187 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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Woking Borough Council

Claimant

Patrick James Keenan

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Appeal by Way of Case Stated / Judgment on Appeal From Magistrates' Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the magistrates were entitled on the evidence to conclude that no offence under s.187(1) Town & Country Planning Act 1990 had been committed
  2. 2 Whether the magistrates gave adequate reasons for their decision

Ratio Decidendi

The magistrates' conclusion that no work had taken place on 23rd September 2003 was perverse unless they explicitly rejected the evidence of Mr Travis, which they failed to do or to give adequate reasons for. The magistrates failed to provide sufficient reasoning for their decision, and did not address the issue of causing or permitting contravention under s.187(1B).

Court Disposition

Decision of the magistrates quashed; matter remitted for reconsideration by a differently constituted bench.

Orders

  • Decision of the magistrates is quashed.
  • Matter remitted for reconsideration by a differently constituted bench.