Whitcher v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government

Whitcher v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government

The claimant's case was dismissed because the reasons given in the decision letter, particularly in paragraphs 45 and 46, were found to be adequate. The judge held that there was no realistic prospect of success on appeal regarding the adequacy of reasons. The costs claimed by the respondents were summarily assessed and reduced due to excessive time spent on document review.

Parties
Appellant: Whitcher; First Respondent: Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government; Second Respondent: New Forest National Park Authority
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
28 October 2015
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Judgment and Post Judgment Discussion
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Judicial Review of Planning Decision, Temporary Planning Permission, Costs Assessment, Permission to Appeal
Administrative Law Planning Law Judicial Review of Planning Decision Temporary Planning Permission Costs Assessment Permission to Appeal

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Whitcher

Appellant

Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government

First Respondent

New Forest National Park Authority

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Judgment and Post Judgment Discussion

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the reasons given in paragraphs 45 and 46 of the decision letter were adequate
  2. 2 Whether temporary planning permission should have been considered based on unmet need and absence of 5 year supply
  3. 3 Assessment of costs claimed by respondents

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant's case was dismissed because the reasons given in the decision letter, particularly in paragraphs 45 and 46, were found to be adequate. The judge held that there was no realistic prospect of success on appeal regarding the adequacy of reasons. The costs claimed by the respondents were summarily assessed and reduced due to excessive time spent on document review.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed

Orders

  • Claim dismissed
  • Costs summarily assessed at £2,500 in favour of the respondents