Shba Ltd v. Aberdeen City Council & Anor [2002] ScotCS 102 (10th April, 2002)

Shba Ltd v. Aberdeen City Council & Anor [2002] ScotCS 102 (10th April, 2002)

The Scottish Ministers did not fail to consider relevant and material considerations in approving the Structure Plan, as the 2001 forecasts were not material to the immediate period in question and were subject to future review. The reasons given were adequate, and the decision was not unreasonable or ultra vires. Even if there had been a failure, it would not have affected the outcome, and there was no substantial prejudice to the appellants.

Citation
[2002] ScotCS 102
Parties
Appellant: SHBA Limited; First Respondent: Aberdeen City Council; Second Respondent: Aberdeenshire Council
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Procedural Posture
Appeal Under Section 238 of the Town and Country Planning (scotland) Act 1997 / Outer House, Court of Session, Decision on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Structure Plans, Judicial Review, Statutory Interpretation, Housing Land Supply, Development Plans

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 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

SHBA Limited

Appellant

Aberdeen City Council

First Respondent

Aberdeenshire Council

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal Under Section 238 of the Town and Country Planning (scotland) Act 1997 / Outer House, Court of Session, Decision on Appeal

  1. 1 Whether Scottish Ministers failed to consider relevant and material considerations (the 2001 forecasts) in approving the Structure Plan
  2. 2 Whether Scottish Ministers gave adequate reasons for their decision
  3. 3 Whether the decision was unreasonable or ultra vires under section 238 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997

Ratio Decidendi

The Scottish Ministers did not fail to consider relevant and material considerations in approving the Structure Plan, as the 2001 forecasts were not material to the immediate period in question and were subject to future review. The reasons given were adequate, and the decision was not unreasonable or ultra vires. Even if there had been a failure, it would not have affected the outcome, and there was no substantial prejudice to the appellants.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed