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.
Reasons had been given for ‘de-zoning’ decision in county development plan
|
or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments |
Supreme Court dismisses appeal from High Court, and affirms refusal to grant judicial review of a decision by a local authority (in a county development plan) to 'de-zone' an area zoned for residential development in order to facilitate the development of a park, on the grounds that: (a) it was not necessary to challenge the whole of the county development plan in order to challenge a zoning decision concerning a particular piece of lands; (b) reasons had been given on a number of occasions for the zoning decision concerning the particular piece of land; and (c) the reasons were not based on irrelevant considerations.
Hogan J (nem diss): Planning and development - decision to de-zone land earlier zoned for residential development - decision to de-zone a small 'infill' site - adoption of new development plan in 2021 - resolution of elected members of local authority - whether adequate reasons given for 'downzoning' lands from residential to community infrastructure - development of park - whether relevant piece of land singled out unfairly - whether development plan was binding on planners - objectives of national planning framework - whether applicant was obliged to challenge the entirety of the development plan in order to challenge particular zoning decision - core strategy - adequacy of reasons - whether reasons were based on irrelevant considerations.
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.
