Source: All England Reporter
Publisher Citation: [2010] All ER (D) 153 (Feb)
Neutral Citation: [2009] EWHC 2330 (Admin)
Court: Queen's Bench Division, Administrative Court (London)
Judge:

Keith Lindblom QC sitting as a deputy judge of the High Court

Representation Thomas Hill QC (instructed by Wragge & Co) for the claimant.
  Rupert Warren and Galina Ward (instructed by the Treasury Solicitor) for the Secretary of State.
  The authority did not appear and was not represented.
  Graham Stoker and Clare Parry (instructed by DMH Stallard) for the third defendant.
Judgment Dates: 4 August 2009

Catchwords

Town and country planning - Permission for development - Outline permission - Local planning authority refusing third defendant's application for outline permission for development on site within area of outstanding natural beauty - Secretary of State's inspector reversing authority's decision on appeal - Conditional permission being granted - Whether inspector erring - s 288.

The Case

Town and country planning Permission for development. The Administrative Court held, dismissing the claimant's application brought under s288 of the that the first defendant Secretary of State's inspector had not gone wrong in law in deciding to allow the planning appeal before him, which appeal had come from a decision of the second defendant local planning authority, and to grant conditional planning permission to the third defendant for a development on a site which was within the High Weald Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.

Practice Areas

If you are a LexisLibrary subscriber you can read more about this case here.