Source: All England Reporter
Publisher Citation: [2012] All ER (D) 63 (Oct)
Neutral Citation: [2012] EWHC 2684 (Admin)
Court: Queen's Bench Division, Administrative Court (London)
Judge:

Judge Birtles sitting as a judge of the High Court

Representation Richard Buxton (instructed by Richard Buxton Environmental & Public Law) for the claimant.
  The authority did not appear and was not represented.
  James Pereira (instructed by Eversheds) for the interested party.
Judgment Dates: 5 October 2012

Catchwords

Judicial review - Application for judicial review - Application for permission to apply for judicial review - Defendant local planning authority granting interested party permission to demolish sports pavilion and to relocate and erect new sports pavilion - Claimant applying for permission to judicially review authority's decision - Whether permission to be granted - Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2001, , , .

The Case

Judicial review Application for judicial review. The claimant brought a claim against a local authority and applied for permission to apply for judicial review to challenge the authority's decision to grant full planning permission to an interested party for the demolition of an existing sports pavilion and the relocation and erection of a new sports pavilion. The main issue was whether the demolition of the old pavilion and the construction of the new pavilion was an 'urban development project' within the meaning of para 10(b) of Sch2 to the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2011, . The Administrative court held that it was not and dismissed the claimant's application for permission to apply for judicial review of the decision. However, the court refused the interested party's application to strike out the main claim.

Practice Areas

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