The council owned land on which it ran a golf course. It set out to privatise it and sought interest. An application was made for planning permission. The applicants objected to the planning permission, saying that the Environmental Impact Assessment was inadequate.
Held: The court felt able to accept oral evidence despite it being an application for judicial review. The examination of the screening option was complete and did not need to be revisited. There was no statutory duty on the respondent to consult the county authority even though it wised to be consulted.
Wyn Williams J
 EWHC 66 (Admin)
Town and Country Planning (Prescription of County Matters) (England) Regulations 2003
England and Wales
Cited – Regina v Swale Borough Council, ex parte Royal Society for the Protection of Birds 1991
A party seeking a judicial review has a duty to go ahead very quickly. The court considered the need for an environmental assessment in respect of the proposed development. . .
Confirmed – Regina (Fernback and Others) v Harrow London Borough Council QBD 15-May-2001
The local planning authority adopted a screening opinion that proposed development was not development requiring an EIA under the 1999 Regulations. About a year later it granted planning permission for the proposed development. Local residents . .
Cited – Regina (on the Application of Kides) v South Cambridgeshire District Council Ltd CA 9-Oct-2002
The applicant sought a judicial review of a grant of planning permission. She said that in the considerable time gap between the decision in principle, and the decision notice, several elements had changed requiring the decision to be reconsidered. . .
Cited – Barker, Regina (on the Application of) v London Borough of Bromley HL 6-Dec-2006
The House was asked whether the 1988 Regulations properly implemented the Directive so as to require environmental impact assessments where the developer first obtained outline permission and then approval of reserved matters, but the need for an . .
Cited – Anderson and Others, Regina (on the Application Of) v City of York Council Admn 13-Jun-2005
Cited – Regina (B) v Merton London Borough Council Admn 14-Jul-2003
The authority had to decide the age of the applicant, an asylum seeker, in order to decide whether a duty was owed to him under the Act. He complained that the procedure adopted was unfair. The 2002 Act did not apply to persons under 18, and he . .
Cited – Younger Homes (Northern) Ltd v First Secretary of State and Another Admn 26-Nov-2003
The claimant sought to quash a planning decision on the basis that a screening decision had not been made.
Held: Though the procedures within the authority could have been bettered, there was no formal requirement for a screening option to . .
Cited – South Buckinghamshire District Council and Another v Porter (No 2) HL 1-Jul-2004
Mrs Porter was a Romany gipsy who bought land in the Green Belt in 1985 and lived there with her husband in breach of planning control. The inspector gave her personal permission to continue use, and it had been appealed and cross appealed on the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Planning, Environment, Judicial Review
Updated: 11 November 2021; Ref: scu.280138