Haden, R (On the Application Of) v Shropshire Council

Haden, R (On the Application Of) v Shropshire Council

The Council had sufficient environmental information to lawfully grant planning permission; its assessment of hydrology, compliance with the development plan, Green Belt policy, and public sector equality duty were all lawful, rational, and adequately reasoned. The conditions and s.106 agreement provided effective safeguards. The Claimant's grounds failed on their merits and were not arguable for renewed permission.

Parties
Claimant: Isabel Haden; Defendant: Shropshire Council; Interested Party: JPE Holding Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
14 January 2020
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Judgment on Merits and Renewed Application for Permission
Outcome
Claim dismissed; renewed application for permission refused.
Legal Topics
Environmental Impact Assessment, Development Plan Compliance, Green Belt Policy, Air Quality, Public Sector Equality Duty
Planning Law Environmental Law Administrative Law Equality Law Environmental Impact Assessment Development Plan Compliance Green Belt Policy Air Quality +1 more

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 5 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Isabel Haden

Claimant

Shropshire Council

Defendant

JPE Holding Ltd

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Judgment on Merits and Renewed Application for Permission

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Shropshire Council breached regulation 3(4) of the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2011 by granting planning permission without adequate environmental information, particularly regarding hydrology.
  2. 2 Whether the Council failed to satisfy legal requirements in relation to the statutory development plan, specifically Core Strategy Policy CS17 and SAMDev Policy MD17.
  3. 3 Whether the Council erred in law in its approach to Green Belt policy, including the assessment of openness and mitigation measures.

Ratio Decidendi

The Council had sufficient environmental information to lawfully grant planning permission; its assessment of hydrology, compliance with the development plan, Green Belt policy, and public sector equality duty were all lawful, rational, and adequately reasoned. The conditions and s.106 agreement provided effective safeguards. The Claimant's grounds failed on their merits and were not arguable for renewed permission.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed; renewed application for permission refused.

Orders

  • Claimant's challenge to the grant of planning permission is dismissed.
  • Renewed application for permission on Grounds 3 and 4 is refused.