Co-Operative Group, R (on the application of) v Rushcliffe Borough

Co-Operative Group, R (on the application of) v Rushcliffe Borough

Policy S2A does not define the town centre for PPG6 purposes; the planning authority was entitled to conclude the site was within the town centre based on national guidance and planning judgment.

Parties
Claimant: Co-operative Group; Defendant: Rushcliffe Borough Council; First Interested Party: Six Continents Retail Ltd; Second Interested Party: Marks & Spencer PLC
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
28 July 2004
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Final Judgment
Outcome
application dismissed
Legal Topics
Town Centre Definition, Retail Development Policy, Local Plan Interpretation, Planning Permission, Judicial Review Grounds

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

Parties

Co-operative Group

Claimant

Rushcliffe Borough Council

Defendant

Six Continents Retail Ltd

First Interested Party

Marks & Spencer PLC

Second Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Final Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the site was within the town centre for purposes of Planning Policy Guidance 6 (PPG6)
  2. 2 Whether Policy S2A of the Local Plan defined the town centre boundary
  3. 3 Whether the planning authority erred in granting permission without demonstrating need

Ratio Decidendi

Policy S2A does not define the town centre for PPG6 purposes; the planning authority was entitled to conclude the site was within the town centre based on national guidance and planning judgment.

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • Claimant to pay defendant's costs, summarily assessed at £10,033.
  • Claimant to pay second interested party's costs for acknowledgment of service and summary grounds, summarily assessed at £2,646.69.