Ledo -v- Planning & Environment 23-Jun-06 [2006] JRC 088A (23 October 2006)

Ledo -v- Planning & Environment 23-Jun-06 [2006] JRC 088A (23 October 2006)

The Committee's refusal was not unreasonable as the proposed driveway would harm the character of the Countryside Zone, and the presumption against new development under Policy C6 was properly applied.

Citation
[2006] JRC 088A
Parties
Appellant: Richard Peter Ledo; Respondent: Environment & Public Services Committee
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
23 October 2006
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Development Permission, Countryside Protection, Agricultural Land Use
Planning Law Administrative Law Development Permission Countryside Protection Agricultural Land Use

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 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Richard Peter Ledo

Appellant

Environment & Public Services Committee

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Committee's refusal of development permission was unreasonable
  2. 2 Interpretation and application of Policies C6 and C13 of the Jersey Island Plan

Ratio Decidendi

The Committee's refusal was not unreasonable as the proposed driveway would harm the character of the Countryside Zone, and the presumption against new development under Policy C6 was properly applied.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed