Category: Planning

Forest of Dean District Council v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government: Admn 20 Dec 2013

The claimant Council challenged the decision of an inspector appointed by the Secretary of State to allow an appeal by the interested party, Mr Jones, and to grant planning permission for the siting of gypsy caravans on land at Newent in Gloucestershire. The Council said the decision was unlawful because the inspector failed to deal properly with the effects of the development on the setting of three listed buildings.
Lindblom J
[2013] EWHC 4052 (Admin)
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 17 August 2021; Ref: scu.519986

HS2 Action Alliance Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for Transport and Another: SC 22 Jan 2014

The government planned to promote a large scale rail development (HS2), announcing this in a command paper. The main issues, in summary, were, first, whether it should have been preceded by strategic environmental assessment, under the relevant European Directive, and, secondly, whether the hybrid bill procedure, as proposed, would comply with the procedural requirements of European law. The Court of Appeal decided both issues against the appellants, the first by a majority (Sullivan LJ dissenting).
Held: The appeal failed, and a reference to the ECJ was refused.
The strategy document was not itself a plan requiring setting the framework for future development consent: ‘It is a very elaborate description of the HS2 project, including the thinking behind it and the government’s reasons for rejecting alternatives. In one sense, it might be seen as helping to set the framework for the subsequent debate, and it is intended to influence its result. But it does not in any way constrain the decision-making process of the authority responsible, which in this case is Parliament.’
Lord Reed set out the nature of a hybrid bill: ‘A hybrid bill shares certain characteristics of a public bill and a private bill. The Speaker has defined a hybrid bill as ‘a public bill which affects a particular private interest in a manner different from the private interests of other persons or bodies of the same category or class’ (Hansard (HC Debates), 10 December 1962, col 45). This hybrid character influences the Parliamentary procedure: a hybrid bill proceeds as a public bill, with a second reading, committee report and third reading, but with an additional select committee stage after the second reading in each House, at which objectors whose interests are directly and specifically affected by the bill (including local authorities) may petition against the bill and be heard. Parliamentary standing orders make provision for those persons who have standing to lodge a petition.’
Lord Neuberger, President, Lady Hale, Deputy President, Lord Mance, Lord Kerr, Lord Sumption, Lord Reed, Lord Carnwath
[2014] UKSC 3, [2014] 2 All ER 109, [2014] PTSR 182, [2014] WLR(D) 28, [2014] 1 WLR 324, UKSC 2013/0172
Bailii, WLRD, Bailii Summary, SC, SC Summary
Strategic Environmental Assessment Directive (Parliament and Council Directive 2001/42/EC, Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2011, Bill of Rights 1689 9, Directive 85/337/EEC, OJ 1985, L 175/40
England and Wales
Citing:
At First Instance – Buckinghamshire County Council and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Transport Admn 15-Mar-2013
The claimants challenged the strategy published by the government for the development of the propose HS2 railway line, saying that it required first a strategic environmentalimpact assessment under European law.
Held: The claim failed. The . .
Appeal from – HS2 Action Alliance Ltd and Others v Secretary of State for Transport CA 24-Jul-2013
The claimants challenged the plan for a major railway development, saying that an environmental impact assessment should have been made first.
Held: (Sullivan LJ dissenting) The claimant’s appeal failed. The strategy as proposed was not such . .
Cited – Terre Wallonne v Wallonia ECJ 17-Jun-2010
ECJ Directive 2001/42/EC – Assessment of the effects of certain plans and programmes on the environment – Directive 91/676/EEC – Protection of waters against pollution caused by nitrates from agricultural sources . .
Cited – Walton v The Scottish Ministers SC 17-Oct-2012
The appellant, former chair of a road activist group, challenged certain roads orders saying that the respondent had not carried out the required environmental assessment. His claim was that the road had been adopted without the consultation . .
Cited – Nomarchiaki Aftodioikisi Aitoloakarnanias And Others ECJ 13-Oct-2011
ECJ Opinion – Environmental protection – Directive 200/60/CE – Policy of the Union in the field of water – Deviation of the course of a river – Concept of time limit for establishing management plans for river . .
Cited – Inter-Environnement Bruxelles v Gouvernement de la Region de Bruxelles-Capitale ECJ 22-Mar-2012
ECJ Directive 2001/42/EC – Assessment of the effects of certain plans and programmes on the environment – Concept of plans and programmes ‘which are required by legislative, regulatory or administrative . .
Cited – Walton v The Scottish Ministers SC 17-Oct-2012
The appellant, former chair of a road activist group, challenged certain roads orders saying that the respondent had not carried out the required environmental assessment. His claim was that the road had been adopted without the consultation . .
Cited – Wiener SI GmbH v Hauptzollamt Emmerich ECJ 20-Nov-1997
ECJ Subheading 60.04 B IV b 2 bb of the Common Customs Tariff, in the version resulting from Regulation No 3400/84 amending Regulation No 950/68 on the Common Customs Tariff, must be construed as covering under . .
Cited – Edinburgh and Dalkeith Railway Company v Wauchope HL 22-Mar-1842
The company had, under authority of a private statute, built a railway which passed across land belonging to the defendant. They were to pay a sum for the goods carried. At first they sought to collect a toll, but his proved unprofitable. The . .
Cited – Lee v Bude and Torrington Junction Railway Co 1871
It was alleged that Parliament had been induced to pass an Act by fraudulent recitals.
Held: Willes J said: ‘Are we to act as regents over what is done by parliament with the consent of the Queen, lords and commons? I deny that any such . .
Cited – Pickin v British Railways Board HL 30-Jan-1974
Courts Not to Investigate Parliament’s Actions
It was alleged that the respondent had misled Parliament to secure the passing of a private Act. The claimant said that the land taken from him under the Act was no longer required, and that he should be entitled to have it returned.
Held: . .
Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for Transport, ex parte Factortame (No 2) HL 11-Oct-1990
The validity of certain United Kingdom legislation was challenged on the basis that it contravened provisions of the EEC Treaty by depriving the applicants of their Community rights to fish in European waters, and an interlocutory injunction was . .
Cited – Wilson v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry; Wilson v First County Trust Ltd (No 2) HL 10-Jul-2003
The respondent appealed against a finding that the provision which made a loan agreement completely invalid for lack of compliance with the 1974 Act was itself invalid under the Human Rights Act since it deprived the respondent of its property . .
Cited – Wheeler, Regina (on the Application of) v Office of the Prime Minister and Another Admn 25-Jun-2008
The claimant sought to challenge the decision by respondent not to offer a referendum before acceding to the Treaty of Lisbon. The claimant’s case was that the Government’s promise to hold a referendum in relation to the European Union . .
Cited – Nomarchiaki Aftodioikisi Aitoloakarnanias And Others ECJ 13-Oct-2011
ECJ Opinion – Environmental protection – Directive 200/60/CE – Policy of the Union in the field of water – Deviation of the course of a river – Concept of time limit for establishing management plans for river . .
Cited – Boxus And Roua (Environment And Consumers) ECJ 18-Oct-2011
ECJ Grand Chamber – Assessment of the effects of projects on the environment – Directive 85/337/EEC – Scope – Concept of ‘specific act of national legislation’ – Aarhus Convention – Access to justice in . .
Cited – Boxus And Roua (Environment And Consumers) ECJ 18-Oct-2011
ECJ Grand Chamber – Assessment of the effects of projects on the environment – Directive 85/337/EEC – Scope – Concept of ‘specific act of national legislation’ – Aarhus Convention – Access to justice in . .
Cited – Marie-Noelle Solvay and Others v Region wallonn ECJ 16-Feb-2012
ECJ Assessment of the effects of projects on the environment – Concept of legislative act – Force and effect of the guidance in the Aarhus Convention Implementation Guide – Consent for a project given without an . .
Cited – WWF and Others v Autonome Provinz Bozen and Others C-435/97 ECJ 16-Sep-1999
ECJ Environment – Directive 85/337/EEC – Assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects . .
Cited – Rex v Electricity Commissioners, ex parte London Electricity Joint Committee Co (1920) Ltd CA 1923
The Commissioners had a statutory duty to make schemes with regard to electricity districts and to hold local enquiries before making them. They made a draft scheme which in effect allocated duties to one body which the Act required should be . .
Cited – Franklin v Minister of Town and Country Planning HL 2-Jul-1947
A government minister had decided to confirm a draft new town order following a public local inquiry. One of the grounds on which the decision was challenged was that the minister could not consider the report and the objections without a . .
Cited – Srl CILFIT v Ministero Della Sanita ECJ 6-Oct-1982
ECJ The obligation to refer to the Court of Justice questions concerning the interpretation of the EEC Treaty and of measures adopted by the community institutions which the third paragraph of article 177 of the . .
Cited – Regina v Her Majesty’s Treasury, Ex parte Smedley CA 19-Dec-1984
The applicant sought, as a taxpayer, to object to the proposed payment of andpound;121m to the European Community without an Appropriation Act, but under an Order in Council. The claim was that a draft Order in Council laid by the Treasury before . .
Cited – Grand Duchy of Luxembourg v Linster and Others ECJ 19-Sep-2000
Where a road or other development project would have a substantial impact on the environment, a law passed by a member state authorising the construction to proceed but which was in the absence of an impact assessment, was not in compliance with the . .
Cited – International Association of Independent Tanker Owners and others v Secretary of State for Transport ECJ 3-Jun-2008
Maritime transport Ship-source pollution Directive 2005/35/EC – Validity United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea Marpol 73/78 Convention – Legal effects of the Conventions – Ability to rely on them Serious negligence – Principle of legal . .
Cited – Regina (Holding and Barnes plc) v Secretary of State for Environment Transport and the Regions; Regina (Alconbury Developments Ltd and Others) v Same and Others HL 9-May-2001
Power to call in is administrative in nature
The powers of the Secretary of State to call in a planning application for his decision, and certain other planning powers, were essentially an administrative power, and not a judicial one, and therefore it was not a breach of the applicants’ rights . .
Cited – Commission v Ireland C-50/09 ECJ 3-Mar-2011
ECJ (Environment And Consumers) Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Directive 85/337/EEC – Obligation of the competent environmental authority to carry out an assessment of the effects of certain . .

Cited by:
Cited – Miller and Dos Santos v The Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union and Others QBD 13-Nov-2016
Article 50 Notice Requires Parliament’s Authority
The applicant challenged a decision by the respondent that he could use Crown prerogative powers to issue a notice under section 50 TUE to initiate the United Kingdom leaving the EU following the referendum under the 2015 Act.
Held: Once the . .
Cited – Miller and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Exiting The European Union SC 24-Jan-2017
Parliament’s Approval if statute rights affected
In a referendum, the people had voted to leave the European Union. That would require a notice to the Union under Article 50 TEU. The Secretary of State appealed against an order requiring Parliamentary approval before issuing the notice, he saying . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 12 August 2021; Ref: scu.520061

Titterrell v Tunbridge Wells Borough Council: Admn 19 Nov 1996

The claimant opposed the council’s proposed structure plan, which would restrain development within his village. The particular issue related to the drawing of the boundary of the village. In this case the confusion was one arisen in a move from a detailed boundary to one defined generally. There was no error of law, and the appeal failed.
[1996] EWHC Admin 244
England and Wales

Updated: 11 August 2021; Ref: scu.136792

Spurrier, Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for Transport: Admn 1 May 2019

Challenge to policy supporting establishment of third runway at Heathrow Airport
Hickinbottom LJ, Holgate J
[2019] EWHC 1070 (Admin)
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
See Also – Spurrier, Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for Transport Admn 2019
Live streaming of video and audio from a court room is prohibited. . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 11 August 2021; Ref: scu.637794

Young, Regina (on the Application of) v Oxford City Council: CA 27 Jun 2002

Challenge to quashing the grant of planning permission by Oxford City Council for the change of use and conversion of a listed building and the construction of five mews houses in the grounds. There was also a listed building consent which is not the subject of challenge.
[2002] EWCA Civ 990, [2002] 3 PLR 86, [2002] 1 WLR 3147, [2002] 3 PLR 86
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 07 August 2021; Ref: scu.276318

The Fairfield Partnership v Huntingdonshire District Council: Admn 23 Oct 2003

The Hon Mr Justice Lindsay
[2003] EWHC 2430 (Admin)
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Westminster City Council v Great Portland Estates plc HL 31-Oct-1984
The House was asked whether the 1971 Act permitted the relevant authorities, by resort to their development plans, to support the retention of traditional industries or was the ambit of the Act such as to permit only ‘land use’ aims to be pursued? . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 06 August 2021; Ref: scu.187059

Langley Park School for Girls, Regina (on the Application of) v Bromley London Borough Council: Admn 25 Feb 2009

Wyn Williams J
[2009] EWHC 324 (Admin), [2009] BLGR 509, [2009] JPL 1210
Bailii
England and Wales
Cited by:
Appeal from – Langley Park School for Girls v London Borough of Bromley and Another CA 31-Jul-2009
Appeal against an Order dismissing the Appellant’s application for judicial review of a grant of planning permission by the Respondent to the Interested Party for the demolition of existing school buildings, the retention and refurbishment of . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 04 August 2021; Ref: scu.314292

Sainsbury’s Supermarkets Ltd v Wolverhampton City Council: CA 31 Jul 2009

The council wanted to exercise its powers of compulsory purchase so as to allow them to acquire the claimant’s land to go toward the completion of the development of a competitor’s proposed supermarket. The claimant sought judicial review, saying that this was not a purpose for which the section could be used.
Held: The claimant’s appeal against the refusal of review failed. Though the benefits referred to did not fall with 226(1A), the council had a duty to consider all maerial considerations under 226(1)(a), and the benefits of the selected scheme were such. Under 226(1A), though the benefits of purchase had to flow from the land itself, the council could allow for the cross subsidy implicit in the development of the site as a whole.
The Council had made a compulsory purchase order of the company’s land in order to facilitate the building of a supermarket by a competitor, Tesco.
Lord Justice Ward, Lord Justice Mummery and Lord Justice Sullivan
[2009] EWCA Civ 734, [2009] EWCA Civ 835, Times 21-Aug-2009, [2010] 1 P and CR 10
Bailii, Bailii
Town and Country Planning Act 1990 226(1)(a)
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Sainsbury’s Supermarkets Ltd, Regina (on the Application of) v Wolverhampton City Council and Tesco Stores Ltd Admn 3-Feb-2009
Each supermarket company and the authority owned part of the site. The authority had granted each an outline permission for a new store, but had decided to allow the Tesco store to proceed. The claimant had at one point indicated that it did not . .
Appeal from – Sainsbury’s Supermarkets Ltd, Regina (on the Application of) v Wolverhampton City Council and Tesco Stores Ltd Admn 3-Feb-2009
Each supermarket company and the authority owned part of the site. The authority had granted each an outline permission for a new store, but had decided to allow the Tesco store to proceed. The claimant had at one point indicated that it did not . .

Cited by:
Appeal from – Sainsbury’s Supermarkets Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v Wolverhampton City Council and Another SC 12-May-2010
The appellant’s land was to be taken under compulsory purchase by the Council who wished to use it to assist Tesco in the construction of a new supermarket. Tesco promised to help fund restoration of a local listed building. Sainsbury objected an . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 04 August 2021; Ref: scu.371877

Langley Park School for Girls v London Borough of Bromley and Another: CA 31 Jul 2009

Appeal against an Order dismissing the Appellant’s application for judicial review of a grant of planning permission by the Respondent to the Interested Party for the demolition of existing school buildings, the retention and refurbishment of certain existing buildings, and the construction of a new secondary school including provision of a 600 seat enhanced performance space, a new 9 court indoor sports hall, and other facilities
Lord Justice Sullivan
[2010] 1 P and CR 10
Balii
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal from – Langley Park School for Girls, Regina (on the Application of) v Bromley London Borough Council Admn 25-Feb-2009
. .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 04 August 2021; Ref: scu.368603

Royale Parks Ltd v Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government and Another: CA 19 Jul 2021

The Appellant challenged the decision of the Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State to dismiss an appeal against the refusal by a local planning authority of a lawful development certificate certifying the lawfulness of ‘the stationing of caravans for the purpose of human habitation as a person’s sole or main place of residence’ on land forming part of a caravan site.
Lord Justice Singh
[2021] EWCA Civ 1101
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 25 July 2021; Ref: scu.666026

Pressland v The Council of The London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham: Admn 15 Jul 2016

‘The question raised by this claim for judicial review is whether or not an application may be made under section 73 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (‘the 1990 Act’) for the grant of planning permission for the development of land without complying with conditions subject to which a prior approval was granted for development permitted by virtue of a development order made by the Secretary of State.’
John Howell QC
[2016] EWHC 1763 (Admin)
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 24 July 2021; Ref: scu.567208

Cole and Another v National Grid Electricity Transmission Plc: UTLC 27 May 2021

BLIGHT NOTICE – Hinkley Point C Connection Project – rights acquired over garden and out building of house in rural location – existing pylons to be removed – new pylons and underground high voltage cables to be installed – whether property blighted – ss.150(1), 151(4)(c) and (g), Town and Country Planning Act 1990 – reference dismissed
[2021] UKUT 126 (LC) (Comm)
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 24 July 2021; Ref: scu.665545

Milton Keynes Council and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government: Admn 11 Apr 2011

Claimant local authorities sought judicial review of the defendant’s decision to make statutory instruments. The claim sought to quash some provisions of the statutory instruments relating to houses in multiple occupation. The Councils, all of whom experienced problems with HMOs, as did other local authorities. The claimants said that the defendant ought to have consulted directly with local planning authorities before deciding to make the two statutory instruments.
[2011] EWHC 1060 (Admin)
Bailii
Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (Amendment) (No 2) (England) Order 2010, Town and Country Planning (Compensation) (No 3) (England) Regulations 2010
England and Wales

Updated: 24 July 2021; Ref: scu.440074

Bury Metropolitan Borough Council v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government and Another: Admn 12 Aug 2011

The council appealed against the inspector’s decision to quash its enforcement notice. The land-owner occupied a wooden structure which he said was a caravan, but the council said was a residence and an unlawful change of use of agricultural land. The landowner said that he was employed on building works on nearby land.
Held: The structure was delivered in two parts by a company designing caravans. It could be re-divided, and taken away again on a caravan delivery vehicle. Though the inspector had doubted whether it could be moved in one piece on its wheels, she thought it could move on a trailer. However there was no evidence before the inspector upon which that decision could be based, and therefore the decision must be quashed.
Waksman QC J
[2011] EWHC 2192 (Admin), [2012] JPL 51
Bailii
Town and Country Planning Act 1990, Caravan Sites Act 1968 13, Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995, Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960 13 29
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Brightlingsea Haven Ltd and Another v Morris and others QBD 30-Oct-2008
The caravan park operated under planning consents requiring the caravans to be occupied only during certain months. The defendants had bought their mobile homes from the claimants to occupy full time, and said that the claimants knew of this. The . .
Cited – Byrne v Secretary of State for Environment and Arun Admn 27-Feb-1997
The appellant sought to quash the decision to confirm an enforcement notice which required him to remove a log cabin from his land. The issue arose whether the cabin was a caravan in law.
Held: It was not a caravan since it was not assembled . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 21 July 2021; Ref: scu.443279

Greyfort Properties Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government: Admn 7 Dec 2010

‘The claimant seeks to keep alive a planning permission granted in 1974 for the development of nineteen flats in Torquay. The claimant contends that by virtue of operations carried out on site in January 1978 that planning permission subsists to this day and permits it, without more, to erect the flats. The flats are of a 1970s design by an architect now deceased. Mr Kingston QC, for the claimants, frankly concedes that the claimant has no wish to put up those flats of that design. This claim is designed to improve the claimant’s bargaining position in negotiations with the planning authority with a view to securing a new permission to put up I know not how many dwellings of whatever design on the site.’
Mitting J
[2010] EWHC 3455 (Admin), [2011] JPL 792, [2011] 16 EG 83
Bailii
England and Wales
Cited by:
Appeal from – Greyfort Properties Ltd v Secretary of State for Communities and Another CA 28-Jul-2011
The parties disputed whether certain works undertaken amounted to a commencement of operations so as to preserve a planning permission.
Held: Richards LJ equated implementation of planning permission with the start of the permitted works, . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 21 July 2021; Ref: scu.442444

Wells v Secretary of State for Environment Transport and the Regions: QBD 5 Apr 2001

The applicant sought to use for residential purposes a property in a row of empty shops. The inspector found that the use contravened the policy of maintaining the use as a shop parade, and that a dilution of that use would further contribute to the decline. The inspector’s decision was upheld. He had properly considered the visual aspect, and the policy. That the shops had not been let did not mean they would not be, and the use for housing would reduce the flow of passers by, and further reduce the chance of success of the policy.
Gazette 05-Apr-2001
England and Wales

Updated: 21 July 2021; Ref: scu.90372

West Midlands Probation Committee v Secretary of State for the Environment and Another: QBD 18 Oct 1996

A justified expectation of crime can be valid ground affecting planning decision.
Times 18-Oct-1996
Town and Country Planning Act 1990 288
England and Wales
Cited by:
Appeal from – West Midlands Probation Committee v Secretary of State for Environment and Walsall Metropolitan Borough Council CA 7-Nov-1997
Fears of local residents about application for bail hostel were relevant when deciding planning application; impact on neighbours. . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 21 July 2021; Ref: scu.90393

Binning Property Corporation Ltd v Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government and Another: CA 28 Feb 2019

[2019] EWCA Civ 250
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Geogas SA v Trammo Gas Ltd (The Baleares) HL 1991
Charterers had appealed an arbitration award. The judge set it aside. The CA gave leave and allowed the appeal saying that as a question of mixed fact and law sought leave to appeal against an arbitration award.
Held: The House had no . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 21 July 2021; Ref: scu.634063

Walsall Metropolitan Borough Council v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government: CA 6 Feb 2013

The Council sought permission to appeal against the setting aside of two enforcement notices, leave having been refused by the Administrative court. The court now considered whether it had jusridiction, and whether the rule in Lane v Esdaile was to be reconsidered.
Held: The appeal failed. The rule in Lane v Esdaile should not be overturned. Recent decisions had done more in fact to confirm the rule, with only very limited exceptions, and ‘All of these authorities emphasise the distinction between the High Court’s judicial review powers and its powers on a statutory appeal. They also emphasise the need for decisions by lower courts and tribunals not to be ‘immune from scrutiny in the higher courts’. Mr Coppel rightly submits that in substance, an appellant on a point of law under section 289 will be raising the kind of arguments that he would be able to raise in judicial review proceedings. But the fact remains that Parliament has chosen to provide a statutory appeal process for challenges to enforcement notices on the very comprehensive grounds set out in section 174. It has not rendered Inspectors’ decisions under section 174 immune from scrutiny in the higher courts; but it has deliberately excluded a challenge to the validity of an enforcement notice on the grounds set out in section 174 by way of judicial review.’
Pill, Sullivan, Tomlinon LJJ
[2013] EWCA Civ 370
Bailii
Town and Country Planning Act 1990
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Lane v Esdaile HL 5-May-1891
The court considered the extent of the House’s jurisdiction as an appellate court. Section 3 of the 1876 Act provided that an appeal should lie to the House of Lords from ‘any order or judgment of . . Her Majesty’s Court of Appeal in England’. The . .
Cited – Huggett v Secretary of State for the Environment Etc; Wendy Fair Markets Ltd v Same; Bello v Etc CA 1-Mar-1995
There is no power for Court of Appeal itself to give leave to appeal after High Court’s refusal of leave on an enforcement notice. The court rejected the applicant’s submission that a High Court judge’s decision refusing permission to appeal under . .
Cited – In re Housing of the Working Classes Act 1890, Ex parte Stevenson CA 1892
A party had applied to a judge for what in effect amounted to leave to appeal and had been refused.
Held: Wherever power is given to a legal authority to grant or refuse leave to appeal, the decision of that authority is, from the very nature . .
Cited – Bland v Chief Supplementary Benefit Officer SSCS 1-Dec-1982
Application for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal against a ruling of the Social Security Commissioner. The tibunal was asked if the Court of Appeal any jurisdiction to give leave to appeal from the refusal of a Social Security Commissioner to . .
Cited – Geogas SA v Trammo Gas Ltd (The Baleares) CA 26-Nov-1990
Judge Wrong to Accept Appeal of Fact
The charterers had sought to appeal the arbitrators’ findings on foreseeability and remoteness. The judge had set aside the arbitration award. Though he certified that a point of law existed which was of general public importance, he had refused . .
Cited – Young v The Bristol Aeroplane Co Ltd CA 28-Jul-1944
Court of Appeal must follow Own Decisions
The claimant was injured and received compensation. He then sought to recover again, alleging breach of statutory duty by his employers.
Held: The Court of Appeal was in general bound to follow its own previous decisions. The court considered . .
Cited – Rickards v Rickards CA 20-Jun-1989
What Lane v. Esdaile decided, and all that it decided, was that where it is provided that an appeal shall lie by leave of a particular court or courts, neither the grant nor refusal of leave is an appealable decision. The Court of Appeal could . .
Cited – Geogas SA v Trammo Gas Ltd (The Baleares) HL 1991
Charterers had appealed an arbitration award. The judge set it aside. The CA gave leave and allowed the appeal saying that as a question of mixed fact and law sought leave to appeal against an arbitration award.
Held: The House had no . .
Cited – Cart v The Upper Tribunal SC 21-Jun-2011
Limitations to Judicial Reviw of Upper Tribunal
Three claimants sought to challenge decisions of various Upper Tribunals by way of judicial review. In each case the request for judicial review had been first refused on the basis that having been explicitly designated as higher courts, the proper . .
Cited – CGU International Insurance Plc and others v Astrazeneca Insurance Co Ltd. CA 16-Oct-2006
Whilst the court of appeal did have a residual discretion to review a refusal by a judge of a grant of leave to appeal against an arbitration based upon an allegation of unfairness such as should undermine the fairness of the decision, that . .
Cited – In re Poh HL 1983
The applicant had unsuccessfully applied to the Divisional Court for leave to apply for judicial review and renewed his application, equally unsuccessfully, to the Court of Appeal. He then petitioned for leave to appeal to the House of Lords.
Cited – Kemper Reinsurance Company v The Minister of Finance and others PC 5-May-1998
(Bermuda) An appeal Court did have jurisdiction to hear an appeal against the discharge of leave to apply for certiorari order, since this was outside scope of the rule in Lane v Esdaille.
Lord Hoffmann said: ‘Nevertheless, the limited nature . .
Cited – Prashar v Secretary of State For Environment, Transport and Regions CA 2-Feb-2001
The court had before it three applications for leave to appeal. Each raised the problem of whether, where a High Court judge has considered an application for permission to appeal under section 289 of the 1990 Act, an appeal can be lodged against . .
Cited – Le Compte, Van Leuven And De Meyere v Belgium ECHR 23-Jun-1981
The applicants were suspended from practising medicine for three months by the Provincial Council of the Ordre des medecins. They appealed unsuccessfully to the Appeal Council and again unsuccessfully to the Court de Cassation. Dr Le Compte . .
Cited – Bryan v The United Kingdom ECHR 22-Nov-1995
Bryan was a farmer at Warrington in Cheshire. He built two brick buildings on land in a conservation area without planning permission and the planning authority served an enforcement notice for their demolition. He appealed on grounds (a) (that . .
Cited – Regina (Holding and Barnes plc) v Secretary of State for Environment Transport and the Regions; Regina (Alconbury Developments Ltd and Others) v Same and Others HL 9-May-2001
Power to call in is administrative in nature
The powers of the Secretary of State to call in a planning application for his decision, and certain other planning powers, were essentially an administrative power, and not a judicial one, and therefore it was not a breach of the applicants’ rights . .
Cited – North Range Shipping Ltd v Seatrans Shipping Corporation CA 14-Mar-2002
The parties had been involved in an arbitration. The claimant sought leave to appeal. The judge refused to give leave, but did not say exactly why.
Held: Human Rights law required a right of appeal. That right could only be exercised properly . .
Cited – Regina v London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham And Others, ex parte Burkett and Another HL 23-May-2002
The applicant sought judicial review of the respondent’s grant of planning permission for a development which would affect her. The authority objected that the application was made after three months after their decision, and so leave should not be . .
Cited – Seal v United Kingdom ECHR 7-Dec-2010
The court considered a procedural filter which prevented the bringing of a claim relating to the exercise of powers under the 1983 Act without the leave of the court.
Held: ‘The Court notes at the outset that the Applicant pursued his . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 19 July 2021; Ref: scu.472962

Liverpool Open and Green Spaces Community Interest Company, Regina (on The Application of) v Liverpool City Council: CA 9 Jul 2020

When a local planning authority granted planning permission for a development of housing in two listed buildings and on land within their settings, did it misinterpret and misapply development plan policy for development proposed within a Green Wedge? And did it fail to comply with the duty in section 66(1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 (‘the Listed Buildings Act’)? Those are the two central questions in this case.
[2020] EWCA Civ 861
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 19 July 2021; Ref: scu.652382

Mayowa-Emmanuel v Royal Borough of Greenwich: Admn 2 Dec 2015

Challenge to a decision of the Inspector in a decision dismissing the Claimant’s appeal against the refusal of the Royal Borough of Greenwich to grant retrospective planning permission for the change of use of premises from B1 (Business, Light Industry) to a mixed use comprising Class D1 (Place of Worship) and Class D2 (a Community Centre) by the congregation of the Jubilation Heritage and Sanctuary of Praise Ministries.`
Rhodri Price Lewis QC DHCJ
[2015] EWHC 4076 (Admin)
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 18 July 2021; Ref: scu.564428

Banbury Golf Centre v First Secretary of State: Admn 10 Jul 2003

Application under section 288 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to quash a decision of the Secretary of State, contained in a decision letter to refuse planning permission for a hotel, golf club house, driving range and community centre at the Banbury Golf Centre
Sullivan J
[2003] EWHC 1790 (Admin)
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 17 July 2021; Ref: scu.185627

Lough and others v First Secretary of State: Admn 21 Jan 2004

The claimants challenged the grant of planning permission for neighbouring land.
The Honourable Mr Justice Collins
[2004] EWHC 23 Admin
Bailii
Town and Country Planning Act 1990 54A
England and Wales
Citing:
Appealed to – Lough and others v First Secretary of State Bankside Developments Ltd CA 12-Jul-2004
The appellants challenged the grant of planning permission for neighbouring land. They sought to protect their own amenities and the Tate Modern Gallery.
Held: The only basis of the challenge was under article 8. Cases established of a breach . .

Cited by:
Appeal from – Lough and others v First Secretary of State Bankside Developments Ltd CA 12-Jul-2004
The appellants challenged the grant of planning permission for neighbouring land. They sought to protect their own amenities and the Tate Modern Gallery.
Held: The only basis of the challenge was under article 8. Cases established of a breach . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 14 July 2021; Ref: scu.192298

Phillips v First Secretary of State and others: Admn 22 Oct 2003

The claimant had objected to the grant of permission to erect a mobile phone mast near her property. The issue was that she had not been given opportunity to comment upon the consideration of alternative sites.
Held: The consideration of alternatives is an integral part of the process of assessment of an application for approval of the siting of telecommunications structures. The applicant for the permission had changed the basis of its application, widening the area of alternatives to 400m. The claimant had proceeded in her objection on the basis that alternatives could only be suggested within a 200m circle. In this case fairness did require that the claimant be given an opportunity to make representations in relation to the increase in the stated search area. ‘It is PPG8 that I consider particularly important in this case. It makes consideration of alternatives an integral part of the process of assessment of an application for approval of the siting of telecommunications structures. ‘ She had to show in addition substantial prejudice from that unfairness. That was shown and the decision was quashed.
The Honourable Mr Justice Richards
[2003] EWHC 2415 (Admin), Times 30-Oct-2003, [2004] JPL 613, [2003] 44 EG 169, [2003] 4 PLR 75
Bailii
Town and Country Planning (Appeals) (Written Representations Procedure) (England) Regulations 2000
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Regina (Jones and Another) v North Warwickshire Borough Council CA 30-Mar-2001
When considering a planning application, it was only in exceptional circumstances that the authority should consider alternative sites. Those circumstances would be where the proposed development would involve such a conspicuous adverse impact, that . .
Cited – Mount Cook Land Ltd and Another v Westminster City Council CA 14-Oct-2003
The applicants had sought judicial review of the defendant’s grant of planning permission for the redevelopment of the former CandA building in Oxford Street. Though the application for leave to apply had been successful, and a full hearing took . .

Cited by:
Cited – St Leger-Davey and Another v First Secretary of State and others CA 1-Dec-2004
The applicants challenged permission granted to erect mobile phone masts, saying that the operators should have made application to the County Court.
Held: the provisions referred to allowed the company to follow a county court procedure where . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 11 July 2021; Ref: scu.187121

Bokhari, Regina (on the Application of) v First Secretary of State and Another: Admn 26 Apr 2005

Application under section 288 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to quash a decision of one of the first defendant’s inspectors contained in a decision letter dismissing the claimant’s appeal against the second defendant’s refusal to grant planning permission for what was described as the removal of rear temporary structure and retention of existing office use on the whole of the ground floor at premises in London.
Sullivan J
[2005] EWHC 913 (Admin)
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 04 July 2021; Ref: scu.225173

Chetwynd v South Norfolk District Council and Others: Admn 13 May 2010

The claimant challenged the grant of planning permissions to a neighbour for the construction of fishing lakes and associated developments on his land. He said his own property had been damaged by the inadequate conditions attached. The area had been designated as a Country Wildlife Site.
Collins J
[2010] EWHC 1070 (Admin)
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 24 June 2021; Ref: scu.414960

Atkins and Others v Wickington and Another: Admn 9 Jul 2015

Challenge to grant of certificate of lawful use of land as motocross circuit.
Dove J
[2015] EWHC 1947 (Admin)
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Petticoat Lane Rentals Ltd v Secretary of State for the Environment CA 1971
A burnt out site had had a lawful use for a market but was granted a planning permission for a new commercial building. When the building had been constructed the market had carried on, on the ground floor of the building and it was contended that . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 22 June 2021; Ref: scu.550016

Petticoat Lane Rentals Ltd v Secretary of State for the Environment: CA 1971

A burnt out site had had a lawful use for a market but was granted a planning permission for a new commercial building. When the building had been constructed the market had carried on, on the ground floor of the building and it was contended that this use was lawful. The use was successfully enforced against.
Held: The appeal failed. Lord Widgery LCJ considered the theory that once a land-owner erects a new building to replace another, that is a new use, and any established use falls: ‘For my part I also think it [Prossors] was entirely correctly decided, but I think that in extending and applying it we should tread wearily and allow our experience to guide us as that experience is obtained. Accordingly I decline to use any general terms in saying what Prossors case decides or how it applies to the present situation, but I am quite confident that the principle in Prossors case can be applied where, as here, one has a clear area of land subsequently developed by the erection of a building over the whole of that land.
Where that happens – and it certainly happened in the case before us – in my judgment – one gets in my judgment an entirely new planning unit created by the new building. The land as such is merged in that new building and a new planning unit with no planning history is achieved. That new planning unit, the new building starts with a nil use, that is to say, immediately after it was completed it was used for nothing, and thereafter any use to which it is put is a change of use, and if that use is not authorised by the planning permission, it is a use which can be restrained by planning control. As in Prossors case it seems to me to make no difference whether the old use sought to be restored was expressly extinguished by the new planning permission, or whether it was merely omitted from the terms of the grant in that permission. The fact that it is not authorised means that it is something which necessarily can be controlled because it is a change of use from the nil use which follows the erection of a new planning unit.’
Lord Widgery CJ
[1971] 2 All ER 793, [1971] 1 WLR 1112
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Jennings Motors Ltd v Secretary of State for the Environment and another CA 27-Nov-1981
The land owners had demolished a building and erected a new building on a small part of the entire site, but without obtaining planning permission. The local authority argued that this was a change of use and a breach of planning control.
Cited – Atkins and Others v Wickington and Another Admn 9-Jul-2015
Challenge to grant of certificate of lawful use of land as motocross circuit. . .
Part Obiter – Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government and Another v Welwyn Hatfield Borough Council SC 6-Apr-2011
The land-owner had planning permission to erect a barn, conditional on its use for agricultural purposes. He built inside it a house and lived there from 2002. In 2006. He then applied for a certificate of lawful use. The inspector allowed it, and . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 22 June 2021; Ref: scu.246385

Bhamjee, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and Regions and Another: CA 28 Feb 2002

[2002] EWCA Civ 311
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
See Also – Bhamjee v Secretary of State for the Environment, Transpost and the Regions and Another Admn 23-Jan-2001
. .
See Also – Bhamjee, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Environment, Transport and Regions and Another CA 29-Jun-2001
. .
See Also – Bhamjee, Regina (on the Application Of) v Secretary of State for the Environment, Transpost and the Regions and Another Admn 9-Nov-2001
. .

Cited by:
See Also – Bhamjee v Secretary of State for Environment, Transport and Regions and Another CA 21-Jun-2002
. .
See Also – Bhamjee v Secretary of State for Environment, Transport and Regions and Another CA 21-Jun-2002
. .
See also – Bhamjee v Forsdick and others CA 14-May-2003
. .
See Also – Bhamjee, Re an Application for Permission Admn 14-Jul-2003
. .
See also – Bhamjee v Forsdick and Others (No 2) CA 25-Jul-2003
The Court set out the range of remedies available to protect court processes from abuse by litigants who persist in making applications totally devoid of merit. The courts are facing very serious contemporary problems created by the activities of . .
See Also – Attorney General v Bhamjee Admn 8-Dec-2003
Civil Restraint Order . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 21 June 2021; Ref: scu.216770

Flynn, Regina (on The Application of) v The London Borough of Southwark Council and Another: CA 28 May 2021

What was the effect of a planning committee’s resolution to grant planning permission for a major mixed-use development, subject to the applicant entering into ‘an appropriate legal agreement’ under section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, which would, among other things, secure the provision of affordable housing?
Sir Kenneth Lindblom, The Senior President of Tribunals
[2021] EWCA Civ 827
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 21 June 2021; Ref: scu.663188

Ocado Retail Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v London Borough of Islington: Admn 7 Jun 2021

How does the 10-year time limit in s.171B(3) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (‘TCPA 1990’) for the taking of enforcement action apply to a breach of condition in a planning permission? What is the legal nature of the right which accrues when a breach of condition becomes immune from enforcement and lawful under s.191(3)? Does the subsistence of such a right depend upon it continuing to be exercised? What is the scope of the power in s.193(7) of TCPA 1990 to revoke a certificate of lawfulness of an existing use or development (a ‘CLEUD’) granted under s.191?
Mr Justice Holgate
[2021] EWHC 1509 (Admin)
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 20 June 2021; Ref: scu.663221

Fidler v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government and Reigate and Banstead Borough Council: Admn 3 Feb 2010

The landowner had concealed his new building (a mock Tudor castle) under straw bales 40′ high, and now appealed against dismissal of his challenge to enforcement orders. He said that the building had been substantially completed more than four years previously.
Held: The appeal failed. The inspector had found the erection or removal of the straw bales had been an integral and essential part of building operations that were intended to deceive the local planning authority and achieve by deception lawful status for a dwelling house built in breach of planning control. The building was not completed till they were removed.
Sir Thayne Forbes
[2010] EWHC 143 (Admin), Times 09-Feb-2010, [2010] NPC 15, [2010] 6 EG 115
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
Distinguished – Sage v Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions and others HL 10-Apr-2003
The appellant had challenged an enforcement notice requiring him to pull down a partially built house. The issue was when the four year limitation period had commenced. Did the four year limitation period commence when the works were complete, or . .

Cited by:
Cited – Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government and Another v Welwyn Hatfield Borough Council SC 6-Apr-2011
The land-owner had planning permission to erect a barn, conditional on its use for agricultural purposes. He built inside it a house and lived there from 2002. In 2006. He then applied for a certificate of lawful use. The inspector allowed it, and . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 20 June 2021; Ref: scu.396625

Kent, Regina (on the Application Of) v First Secretary of State and others: Admn 3 Dec 2004

[2004] EWHC 2953 (Admin)
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Regina v Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council, Ex Parte Milne (2) QBD 31-Jul-2000
Developers submitted applications for outline permission for the development of a business park. The applicant sought to quash the grant on the basis that the environmental assessment was insufficiently detailed, and contained reserved matters, and . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 17 June 2021; Ref: scu.226929