The court was asked whether an Inspector should have had regard to the changes in ministerial policy which were to lead to the introduction of section 54A of the 1990 Act.
Held: Hutchinson J said (obiter): ‘that the Inspector was not obliged to have regard to section 54A before it came into force . . Her correct course, I consider, was to have regard to current statutory provisions and to the guidance to be derived from any circulars published prior to her decision, in particular [Circular] 14/91. One piece of guidance that circular gave was that current circulars already reflected the spirit of the new provision; another was that section 54A was to be brought into effect about two months after July 25 and that ‘In future it will mean that determination is to be in accordance with the plan unless etc’ This language is, I am satisfied, if anything an encouragement not to give effect to changes dependent wholly on the new section: but it is coupled with encouragement to recognise that existing policy is, matters of nuance apart, broadly consistent with that embodied in the section.’
Judges:
Hutchinson J
Citations:
[1990] JPL 40
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Cala Homes (South) Ltd v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government and Another Admn 7-Feb-2011
The claimant sought judicial review of a statement and letter by the respondent making a material consideration for planning authorities the intended revocation by the Respondent of Regional Spatial Strategies. The effect would be to allow the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Planning
Updated: 20 May 2022; Ref: scu.428514