Robert Spedding (R on the application of) v Wiltshire Council

Robert Spedding (R on the application of) v Wiltshire Council

The Council failed to lawfully determine whether the Application Land was within the curtilage of the Building as required by Paragraph X of the GPDO, failed to give reasons as required by Regulation 7 of the 2014 Regulations, and took into account immaterial considerations regarding traffic movements without assessing the real prospect of fallback agricultural use. The Decision was therefore unlawful and must be quashed.

Parties
Claimant: ROBERT SPEDDING; Defendant: WILTSHIRE COUNCIL; Interested Party: SCHEPENS INTERNATIONAL LIMITED
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 February 2022
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Final Judgment
Outcome
Claimant succeeds on Grounds 1, 1A, and 2; Decision quashed.
Legal Topics
Judicial Review, Permitted Development, Curtilage Definition, Duty to Give Reasons, Material Considerations, Fallback Development, Prior Approval, Traffic Impact, Evidence Admissibility
Administrative Law Planning Law Judicial Review Permitted Development Curtilage Definition Duty to Give Reasons Material Considerations Fallback Development +3 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 5 Authorities cited 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

ROBERT SPEDDING

Claimant

WILTSHIRE COUNCIL

Defendant

SCHEPENS INTERNATIONAL LIMITED

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Council failed to consider if the proposed use was within the curtilage of the building as defined by Paragraph X of the GPDO
  2. 2 Whether the Council was under a duty to give reasons and failed to give adequate reasons
  3. 3 Whether the Council took into account traffic movements related to previous agricultural use without considering if there was a real prospect of that operation resuming

Ratio Decidendi

The Council failed to lawfully determine whether the Application Land was within the curtilage of the Building as required by Paragraph X of the GPDO, failed to give reasons as required by Regulation 7 of the 2014 Regulations, and took into account immaterial considerations regarding traffic movements without assessing the real prospect of fallback agricultural use. The Decision was therefore unlawful and must be quashed.

Court Disposition

Claimant succeeds on Grounds 1, 1A, and 2; Decision quashed.

Orders

  • Decision of Wiltshire Council dated 30 March 2021 quashed.
  • Declaration that Schepens International Limited may not proceed with its proposed change of use until the Council redetermines whether prior approval is required.