LIDDELL, COLIN LIDDELL AND OTHERS FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW [2019] ScotCS CSOH_57 (31 July 2019)

LIDDELL, COLIN LIDDELL AND OTHERS FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW [2019] ScotCS CSOH_57 (31 July 2019)

The planning authority did not err in law or act irrationally in deciding that the proposed development would not affect the setting of Ardencaple House. The decision not to visit the listed building itself was within the scope of professional planning judgment, and the statutory duties were properly considered.

Citation
[2019] ScotCS CSOH_57
Parties
Petitioners: Colin Liddell and Others; Respondent: Argyll and Bute Council
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
31 July 2019
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Outer House, Court of Session, Opinion
Outcome
Petition refused
Legal Topics
Listed Buildings, Development Plan, Planning Permission, Judicial Review, Setting of Listed Buildings
Planning Law Administrative Law Listed Buildings Development Plan Planning Permission Judicial Review Setting of Listed Buildings

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 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Colin Liddell and Others

Petitioners

Argyll and Bute Council

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Outer House, Court of Session, Opinion

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the planning authority failed to apply the development plan and statutory duties regarding listed buildings and their settings.
  2. 2 Whether failure to visit Ardencaple House was a material error in the planning decision process.

Ratio Decidendi

The planning authority did not err in law or act irrationally in deciding that the proposed development would not affect the setting of Ardencaple House. The decision not to visit the listed building itself was within the scope of professional planning judgment, and the statutory duties were properly considered.

Court Disposition

Petition refused

Orders

  • Sustain the second plea in law for the respondents
  • Refuse the petition