Bishop, R (on the application of) v Westminster Council & Ors [2017] EWHC 3102 (Admin) (15 December 2017)

Bishop, R (on the application of) v Westminster Council & Ors [2017] EWHC 3102 (Admin) (15 December 2017)

The planning permission was quashed because the applicant for the second planning application failed to notify the claimant, an owner of part of the land, as required by Article 13 of the DMPO and section 65 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. The certificate of ownership was recklessly completed with false...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2017] EWHC 3102 (Admin)
Parties
Claimant: Alan Bishop; Defendant: Westminster Council; Interested Party: Nadeem Ullah; Interested Party: Mortimer London Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
15 December 2017
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Final Judgment
Outcome
Claim allowed in part; planning permission quashed on Ground 1; claim dismissed on Ground 2.
Legal Topics
Planning Permission, Certificate of Ownership, Procedural Fairness, Legitimate Expectation, Judicial Review, Notification Requirements
Administrative Law Planning Law Planning Permission Certificate of Ownership Procedural Fairness Legitimate Expectation Judicial Review Notification Requirements

Source-derived case record

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 13 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Alan Bishop

Claimant

Westminster Council

Defendant

Nadeem Ullah

Interested Party

Mortimer London Limited

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant for planning permission failed to notify an owner of the land as required by law
  2. 2 Whether the local planning authority failed to notify an adjoining owner or occupier as required by law
  3. 3 Whether the court should exercise its discretion to quash the planning permission despite procedural defects

Ratio Decidendi

The planning permission was quashed because the applicant for the second planning application failed to notify the claimant, an owner of part of the land, as required by Article 13 of the DMPO and section 65 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. The certificate of ownership was recklessly completed with false and misleading information, and the court found no grounds to exercise its discretion to refuse relief. The challenge based on failure to notify as an adjoining owner failed, as there was no legitimate expectation or procedural unfairness established.

Court Disposition

Claim allowed in part; planning permission quashed on Ground 1; claim dismissed on Ground 2.

Orders

  • The second planning permission is quashed.
  • No relief granted on Ground 2.