Williams, R (on the application of) v Powys County Council & Anor

Williams, R (on the application of) v Powys County Council & Anor

The planning authority did not err in law or fact: it was entitled to conclude, based on the material before it and the absence of specific concerns, that the proposed development did not affect the setting of the listed building or require further consideration under s 66(1); there was no statutory duty to consult...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Claimant: Graham Williams; Defendant: Powys County Council; Interested Party: Colin Bagley
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
07 March 2016
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Final Judgment
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Listed Buildings, Scheduled Monuments, Judicial Review, Planning Permission, Heritage Assets, Statutory Interpretation
Planning Law Administrative Law Heritage Law Listed Buildings Scheduled Monuments Judicial Review Planning Permission Heritage Assets +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 5 Authorities cited 21 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Graham Williams

Claimant

Powys County Council

Defendant

Colin Bagley

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the planning authority failed to have regard to the effect of the proposed development on a listed building under s 66(1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990
  2. 2 Whether the planning authority failed to consult CADW as required under the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedures) (Wales) Order 2012
  3. 3 Whether the planning authority failed to consider the effect of the development on all relevant scheduled ancient monuments

Ratio Decidendi

The planning authority did not err in law or fact: it was entitled to conclude, based on the material before it and the absence of specific concerns, that the proposed development did not affect the setting of the listed building or require further consideration under s 66(1); there was no statutory duty to consult CADW as the development did not affect the site of a scheduled monument within the statutory meaning; and the authority made a reasonable judgment as to which scheduled ancient monuments required consideration. Any procedural errors would not have led to a substantially different outcome.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed