||All England Reporter
|| All ER (D) 260 (Oct)
|| EWHC 2884 (TCC)
||Queen's Bench Division, Technology and Construction Court
||Andrew Nicol (instructed by Taylor Vinters LLP) for the claimant.
||Elspeth Owens (instructed by Watson Burton LLP) for the defendant.
||24 October 2012
Town and country planning - Development - Permitted development - Defendant company seeking local authority's opinion on need for planning permission with respect to proposed development - Authority advising permission not being required - Defendant so advising claimant - Individuals subsequently commencing judicial review proceedings against claimant with respect to proposed development - Claimant settling proceedings - Claimant commencing proceedings against defendant for professional negligence and breach of retainer - Whether defendant negligent.
Town and country planning Development. A drainage authority retained an engineering company to provide consultancy services in respect of proposed works. The company advised that planning permission was not required on the basis of correspondence with a local authority and of the option to obtain a Certificate of Proposed Lawful Use. After settling proceedings in respect of the proposed works, the authority commenced proceedings against the company for negligence and breach of its retainer. The Technology and Construction Court found no negligence on the part of the defendant.
- 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
- Commentary discussing this particular case from LexisLibrary's comprehensive range of titles including Butterworths, Halsbury's and TolleyView related commentary
- 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