Source: All England Reporter
Publisher Citation: [2002] All ER (D) 468 (Mar)
Neutral Citation: [2002] EWHC 699 (Admin)
Court: Administrative Court
Judge:

Sullivan J

Representation William Otton (instructed by Earthrights, Essex) for the claimant.
  Thomas Hill (instructed by Stuart Ashurst ) for the defendant.
Judgment Dates: 27 March 2002

Catchwords

Town and country planning - Planning authority - Exercise of discretion - Local plan - Authority proposing local plan - Claimants objecting to policy on incineration contained in proposed local plan - Authority adopting local plan - Claimants seeking to quash policy contained in plan - Claimants arguing authority acting under mistaken belief that it was not entitled to prohibit incineration - Whether policy to be quashed - Town and County Planning Act 1990, s 287.

The Case

In circumstances where claimants challenged the adoption of a local plan by a council, on the basis that there had been substantial objections to a policy relating to incineration contained in that plan, and that councillors had mistakenly believed that they were prohibited from placing an exclusion on incineration, the court determined that unless it could be established that a majority of councillors acted on a false premise, it would be of no consequence that confusion, however regrettable, might have persisted in the minds of some members.

Practice Areas

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