Innovia Cellophane Ltd & Anor, R (on the application of) v NNB Generation Company Ltd

Innovia Cellophane Ltd & Anor, R (on the application of) v NNB Generation Company Ltd

The proposed workers’ accommodation does not constitute 'dwellings' excluded from associated development under section 115(2)(b) of the Planning Act 2008; the Commission properly applied its last resort policy in granting the section 53 authorisation after prolonged failed negotiations; and the conditions attached to the authorisation were adequate and enforceable, with further protection provided by a contractual indemnity. The claim is dismissed.

Parties
Claimant: Innovia Cellophane Ltd and Innovia Films Ltd; Defendant: The Infrastructure Planning Commission; Interested Party: NNB Generation Company Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
04 November 2011
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Judgment
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Judicial Review, Infrastructure Planning, Statutory Interpretation, Human Rights, Land Access
Administrative Law Planning Law Judicial Review Infrastructure Planning Statutory Interpretation Human Rights Land Access

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 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Innovia Cellophane Ltd and Innovia Films Ltd

Claimant

The Infrastructure Planning Commission

Defendant

NNB Generation Company Ltd

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Commission acted unlawfully in granting section 53 authorisation for land entry under the Planning Act 2008
  2. 2 Whether the proposed workers’ accommodation constitutes 'dwellings' excluded from associated development under section 115(2)(b) of the Planning Act 2008
  3. 3 Whether the Commission failed to apply its own 'last resort' policy before granting authorisation

Ratio Decidendi

The proposed workers’ accommodation does not constitute 'dwellings' excluded from associated development under section 115(2)(b) of the Planning Act 2008; the Commission properly applied its last resort policy in granting the section 53 authorisation after prolonged failed negotiations; and the conditions attached to the authorisation were adequate and enforceable, with further protection provided by a contractual indemnity. The claim is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed