Austin, R (on the application of) v Haulfryn Group Ltd & Anor

Austin, R (on the application of) v Haulfryn Group Ltd & Anor

The Officer’s Report did not mislead the committee, correctly applied Core Policy 39 as an extension to existing facilities, and properly considered the statutory and policy requirements regarding listed buildings, concluding no harm to the significance of the Church. No ground of challenge was made out.

Parties
Claimant: Roger Austin for and on behalf of the Brokerswood Residents Group; Defendant: Wiltshire Council; Interested Party: Haulfryn Group Limited; Interested Party: Tregura Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 January 2017
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Final Judgment
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Planning Permission, Tourist Development, Listed Buildings, Judicial Review, Local Authority Decision Making
Planning Law Administrative Law Planning Permission Tourist Development Listed Buildings Judicial Review Local Authority Decision Making

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 17 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Roger Austin for and on behalf of the Brokerswood Residents Group

Claimant

Wiltshire Council

Defendant

Haulfryn Group Limited

Interested Party

Tregura Limited

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the planning committee was misled regarding the extent of the site with existing planning permission
  2. 2 Whether Core Policy 39 of the Wiltshire Core Strategy was misinterpreted or misapplied
  3. 3 Whether the statutory test under section 66 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 and paragraph 134 of the NPPF was properly considered

Ratio Decidendi

The Officer’s Report did not mislead the committee, correctly applied Core Policy 39 as an extension to existing facilities, and properly considered the statutory and policy requirements regarding listed buildings, concluding no harm to the significance of the Church. No ground of challenge was made out.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed