The appellant had objected to a neighbour’s planning application. Contested applications could only be handled under delegated powers where the permission sought would comply with the relevant policies. The application was granted because in the officer’s mistaken view it did comply. On appeal to the High Court it was held that what mattered was the officer’s subjective judgement.
Held: The scheme under which the delegated powers were exercised allowed for no subjectivity. He did retain some discretion, but must at least make a full consideration as to whether it complied. He had not done so in this case, and the grant of permission was invalid. The later grant of the permission by the full council did not change that.
Judges:
Lords Justice Pill and Robert Walker and Sir Martin Nourse
Citations:
Gazette 27-Jun-2002, Times 11-Jul-2002
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal from – Regina (on the Application of Carlton-Conway) v London Borough of Harrow Admn 7-Nov-2001
The applicant objected to an application for planning permission by a neighbour. The authority authorised officers to exercise delegated powers to grant permission where no objection had been received. Even then the officer could exercise the power . .
Cited by:
Appealed to – Regina (on the Application of Carlton-Conway) v London Borough of Harrow Admn 7-Nov-2001
The applicant objected to an application for planning permission by a neighbour. The authority authorised officers to exercise delegated powers to grant permission where no objection had been received. Even then the officer could exercise the power . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Planning, Local Government
Updated: 08 May 2022; Ref: scu.174166