||All England Reporter
|| All ER (D) 231 (Mar)
|| EWHC 424 (Admin)
||Stephen Hockman QC and Kevin Leigh (instructed by Jennings Son & Ash) for the claimants.
||Nathalie Lieven (instructed by the Treasury Solicitor) for the defendants.
||15 March 2002
Town and country planning - Permission for development - Refusal - Appeal - Earlier planning inspector's decision quashed by courts - Relevant local plan policy not identifying openness as primary aim for national park - Whether second inspector entitled to rely on facts recorded in first inspector's decision - Whether second inspector in error in considering openness - Whether second inspector correctly applying policy.
Notwithstanding that an earlier decision by a planning inspector on the proposed development had been quashed by the courts, the second inspector was entitled, in the circumstances, to rely on that earlier decision letter as a record of the agreed position of the parties. Furthermore, in the instant case, the planning inspector had not erred in considering the openness of the countryside in the context of a local plan relating to national parks, which did not identify openness as a primary aim for the parks.
- An Official transcript is the final version of the judgment prepared by shorthand writers. LexisLibrary contains all judgments from the High Court and aboveView Judgment
- The All England Law Reports comprises judgments with headnotes and catchwords indicating the area of law and key issues of the case prepared by legally qualified editorsFind AllER Reports
- Cases related to this particular case that are related to, or discuss this caseView related cases
- Commentary discussing this particular case from LexisLibrary's comprehensive range of titles including Butterworths, Halsbury's and TolleyView related commentary