Sharma v Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government & Ors [2018] EWHC 2355 (Admin) (12 September 2018)

Sharma v Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government & Ors [2018] EWHC 2355 (Admin) (12 September 2018)

The Inspector lawfully assessed the fallback position, properly considered both spatial and visual aspects of openness, took into account the proposed buffer zone, and gave adequate reasons. The applicant's grounds amount to disagreement with planning judgment, not legal error. The appeal is dismissed.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2018] EWHC 2355 (Admin)
Parties
Applicant: Peter Sharma; First Respondent: Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government; Second Respondent: Spelthorne Borough Council; Interested Party: National Carparking Limited; Interested Party: Jim Power and Ann Power
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
12 September 2018
Procedural Posture
Planning Statutory Appeal Under S.289 Town & Country Planning Act 1990 / High Court Judgment on Appeal From Inspector's Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Green Belt, Enforcement Notice, Lawful Development Certificate, Openness, Very Special Circumstances, Planning Permission, Fallback Position
Planning Law Administrative Law Green Belt Enforcement Notice Lawful Development Certificate Openness Very Special Circumstances Planning Permission +1 more

Source-derived case record

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 4 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Peter Sharma

Applicant

Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government

First Respondent

Spelthorne Borough Council

Second Respondent

National Carparking Limited

Interested Party

Jim Power and Ann Power

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Planning Statutory Appeal Under S.289 Town & Country Planning Act 1990 / High Court Judgment on Appeal From Inspector's Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Inspector lawfully assessed the fallback position under the Lawful Development Certificates when considering openness and harm to the Green Belt
  2. 2 Whether the Inspector properly considered the visual dimension of openness from all relevant viewpoints
  3. 3 Whether the Inspector properly considered the impact of a proposed buffer zone condition on openness

Ratio Decidendi

The Inspector lawfully assessed the fallback position, properly considered both spatial and visual aspects of openness, took into account the proposed buffer zone, and gave adequate reasons. The applicant's grounds amount to disagreement with planning judgment, not legal error. The appeal is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The Inspector's decision stands
  • Applicant's appeal is dismissed