Thompson v Pendle Borough Council

Thompson v Pendle Borough Council

Mr Thompson lacked standing as he was neither a substantial objector nor had a relevant interest in the land. Even if he had standing, the procedural defects identified were minor, caused no substantial prejudice, and were rectified. The Council acted lawfully and rationally in making and confirming the Tree Preservation Order.

Parties
Claimant: Brian Thompson; Defendant: Pendle Borough Council
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
04 May 2011
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (section 288 Challenge) / Judgment After Full Hearing
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Tree Preservation Orders, Standing (locus Standi), Procedural Fairness, Costs
Administrative Law Planning Law Tree Preservation Orders Standing (locus Standi) Procedural Fairness Costs

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Brian Thompson

Claimant

Pendle Borough Council

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review (section 288 Challenge) / Judgment After Full Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant had standing to challenge the Tree Preservation Order under section 288 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990
  2. 2 Whether there were procedural defects in the making and confirmation of the Tree Preservation Order and if so, whether they caused substantial prejudice
  3. 3 Whether the Council acted lawfully and rationally in making the Tree Preservation Order

Ratio Decidendi

Mr Thompson lacked standing as he was neither a substantial objector nor had a relevant interest in the land. Even if he had standing, the procedural defects identified were minor, caused no substantial prejudice, and were rectified. The Council acted lawfully and rationally in making and confirming the Tree Preservation Order.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed

Orders

  • Claim dismissed
  • Claimant to pay defendant's costs, subject to detailed assessment if not agreed