Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel. Click here to request a subscription.
Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel.
Click here to request a subscription.
Application for substitute consent in planning matter was patently and materially incorrect from the outset
|
or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments |
High Court, in planning and development judicial review proceedings concerning a deficient application for substitute consent and a related further development application in respect of quarry works, quashes the planning board's subsequent decisions on foot of the applications, on the grounds that: the applicant's filing of incorrect maps in respect of the land sought to be developed resulted in the filing of materially and patently incorrect applications to the board in breach of mandatory planning regulatory procedural requirements, with the result that the board never had valid applications before it in the first instance in order to decide matters in the way in which it did.
Judicial review - planning and development - substitute consent - further development application - quarry works - chronology - legislative requirements undermining substitute consent - serious and material defect in planning application - incorrect copy maps of lands provided - application to planning board patently and substantially incorrect - planning regulations procedural requirements mandatory - certiorari in respect of decision refusing permission for continued development.
Note: This is intended to be a fair and accurate report of a decision made public by a court of law. Any errors should be notified to the editor and will be dealt with accordingly.
