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.
Planning board decision failed to provide proper statement of main reasons and considerations
|
or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments |
High Court sets aside planning board's decision to refuse applicant's request for planning permission for development of a dwelling house and agricultural buildings in a rural area, and remits the matter back to the board to reconsider the applicant's appeal, on the grounds that decision's failure to provide a proper statement of the main reasons and considerations frustrates the court in its supervisory function in judicial review proceedings.
Judicial review - planning and development - decision to refuse planning permission for development of dwelling house and agricultural buildings - whether planning board properly applied development plan policies - rationale for conclusion of decision not recorded - inspector's report - standard of reasoning - decision set aside with order directing remittal on basis that planning appeal be reconsidered in its entirety - background facts - proposed heliculture business - aspects of development plan - 'local need' criterion - planning authority's initial decision to refuse planning permission - planning history - purported demonstration with 'local need' requirement - one-off housing criteria - additional information provided to board to consider - statement of main reasons and considerations - reasoning should be evident from its decision - legal test to be applied in assessing adequacy of reasons in planning matters - failure to meet requisite standard even when decision is read in conjunction with inspector's report - absence of reasons and considerations frustrates High Court in its exercise of its supervisory jurisdiction by way of judicial review.
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.
