CPRE Surrey & Anor v Waverley Borough Council & Ors

CPRE Surrey & Anor v Waverley Borough Council & Ors

The Inspector's approach to Woking's unmet need and the allocation of unmet need to Waverley was a lawful exercise of planning judgment, proportionate to the evidence and statutory remit. There was no error of law or inadequacy of reasons. The allocation of Dunsfold Aerodrome was justified independently of the unmet need calculation. The s.113 and s.288 challenges are dismissed.

Parties
Claimant: CPRE Surrey; Claimant: POW Campaign Limited; Defendant: Waverley Borough Council; Defendant: Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government; Interested Party: Dunsfold Airport Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
05 November 2018
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Statutory Challenge / Judgment
Outcome
All applications dismissed
Legal Topics
Local Plan Adoption, Objectively Assessed Need (oan), Unmet Housing Need, Statutory Challenge Under S.113 PCPA, Statutory Challenge Under S.288 TCPA, Duty to Cooperate, Planning Permission for New Settlement
Planning Law Administrative Law Local Government Law Local Plan Adoption Objectively Assessed Need (oan) Unmet Housing Need Statutory Challenge Under S.113 PCPA Statutory Challenge Under S.288 TCPA +2 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 4 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

CPRE Surrey

Claimant

POW Campaign Limited

Claimant

Waverley Borough Council

Defendant

Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government

Defendant

Dunsfold Airport Limited

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Statutory Challenge / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Waverley Borough Council erred in law in adopting Local Plan policies ALH1, SS7 and SS7A by including unmet housing need from Woking
  2. 2 Whether the Local Plan Inspector's approach to Woking's unmet need was lawful
  3. 3 Whether the Inspector's reasons were adequate

Ratio Decidendi

The Inspector's approach to Woking's unmet need and the allocation of unmet need to Waverley was a lawful exercise of planning judgment, proportionate to the evidence and statutory remit. There was no error of law or inadequacy of reasons. The allocation of Dunsfold Aerodrome was justified independently of the unmet need calculation. The s.113 and s.288 challenges are dismissed.

Court Disposition

All applications dismissed