Anthony Ward v Torridge District Council

Anthony Ward v Torridge District Council

The planning officer failed to properly consider whether there was a real prospect that the Interested Party would continue dairy operations without the unauthorised development, as required by law. All available evidence indicated the unauthorised works were fundamental to the dairy operation, and the officer did not address this. The officer also failed to properly address Natural England’s advice regarding SSSI impacts and did not require sufficient information on odour impacts.

Parties
Claimant: Anthony Ward; Defendant: Torridge District Council; Interested Party: James and Kelly Seabridge
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 October 2024
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Judgment
Outcome
Application for judicial review allowed
Legal Topics
Judicial Review, Planning Permission, Environmental Impact, Odour Assessment, Sites of Special Scientific Interest
Planning Law Environmental Law Judicial Review Planning Permission Environmental Impact Odour Assessment Sites of Special Scientific Interest

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 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Anthony Ward

Claimant

Torridge District Council

Defendant

James and Kelly Seabridge

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the planning authority lawfully concluded the existence of a fall-back position for the Interested Party to operate a dairy farm without the unauthorised development
  2. 2 Whether the planning authority failed to accord appropriate weight to Natural England’s objection regarding SSSIs
  3. 3 Whether the planning authority failed to obtain sufficient information on odour impacts

Ratio Decidendi

The planning officer failed to properly consider whether there was a real prospect that the Interested Party would continue dairy operations without the unauthorised development, as required by law. All available evidence indicated the unauthorised works were fundamental to the dairy operation, and the officer did not address this. The officer also failed to properly address Natural England’s advice regarding SSSI impacts and did not require sufficient information on odour impacts.

Court Disposition

Application for judicial review allowed

Orders

  • The grant of planning permission is quashed.