‘The Court of Appeal is set to make a ruling over Heathrow’s expansion in a case described by green groups as massively significant. Judges will decide whether Heathrow’s expansion plans took into account climate change commitments.’
BBC News, 27th February 2020
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘A High Court judge has granted permission for a planning judicial review challenge in part over an alleged breach of the public sector equality duty, Landmark Chambers has reported.’
Local Government Lawyer, 21st February 2020
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘The statistics are against allowed appeals at the moment. Positive decisions from PINS on housing appeals are down. Appeals are failing in particular on heritage related matters. It is therefore critical in my view to neutralise as many issues as early as possible. And to be clear about the real focus from the outset. This appeal had ‘a full house’ when it came to an array of concerns, and some were heard through a round-table forum, making it hard to test assertions, particularly from members of the public.’
No. 5 Chambers, 17th February 2020
Source: www.no5.com
‘Luton Council is to bring a judicial review of Central Bedfordshire Council’s decision to approve an application for a new link road after it says local plan examination inspectors’ letters calling the plan into question were not properly considered.’
Local Government Lawyer, 17th February 2020
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘Towards the end of last year, the General Regulatory Chamber of the First-Tier Tribunal (‘FTT’) determined an appeal by the owner of a 46-acre greenfield site against the decision of the local authority, Winchester City Council, to list the land as an Asset of Community Value (‘ACV’).’
Exchange Chambers, 12th February 2020
Source: www.exchangechambers.co.uk
‘Inappropriate development is, by definition, harmful to the Green Belt and should not be approved except in very special circumstances (NPPF paragraph 143).’
Exchange Chambers, 12th February 2020
Source: www.exchangechambers.co.uk
‘The provisions in the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 which permit changes of use from office to residential have been controversial, particularly in parts of the south of England where many local authorities fear the effects upon the supply of office accommodation in their areas. As a result, a number of authorities have exercised the powers in Article 4 of the Order to withdraw the rights from parts of their areas. A recent case in the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) illustrates the issues involved where a Council adopts a different approach by attempting to rely on its rights as landlord to enforce leasehold restrictive covenants to prevent the implementation of a change of use proposal.’
Exchange Chambers, 12th February 2020
Source: www.exchangechambers.co.uk
‘Under Part 16 Class A of Schedule 2 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 development consisting of the installation, alteration or replacement of any electronic communications apparatus is permitted development, subject to a requirement for prior approval.’
Exchange Chambers, 12th February 2020
Source: www.exchangechambers.co.uk
‘As the United Kingdom begins to plot a new course outside the European Union, 2020 has begun with a flurry of reports (doubtless with one eye on the forthcoming Planning White Paper in England) recommending changes to planning law and land use policies, whether in the interests of economic development, more beautiful places, nature conservation or combatting climate change.’
Exchange Chambers, 12th February 2020
Source: www.exchangechambers.co.uk
‘Part 1 of the Vale of White Horse Local Plan was adopted in December 2016 and showed some land in North Hinksey Village as within the Oxford Green Belt. When the plan was being prepared, the Council had proposed to remove the land from the Green Belt but the proposal (along with others) was not supported by the Local Plan Inspector and the Council published modifications to the draft plan intended to give effect to the Inspector’s recommendations. The plan was adopted with the modifications but by mistake the Proposals Map showed the land as within the settlement boundary of North Hinksey and thereby not within the Green Belt. The mistake was, apparently, a simple administrative error.’
Exchange Chambers, 12th February 2020
Source: www.exchangechambers.co.uk
‘The procedure in Section 73 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 permits a developer to apply for planning permission to carry out development already authorised by an extant planning permission without complying with one or more of the conditions of that permission.’
Exchange Chambers, 12th February 2020
Source: www.exchangechambers.co.uk
‘The Court of Appeal has just dismissed the actions in nuisance by residents of flats adjacent to the the Tate Modern art gallery on the south bank of the River Thames in central London. (Disclaimer: the author of this post has just moved into an apartment in the area but has no association with the flats or the residents central to this appeal.)’
UK Human Rights Blog, 13th February 2020
Source: ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘A Planning Court judge has dismissed a judicial review challenge over the Secretary of State for Transport’s decision to decline to accept that development proposed in a planning application for Stansted Airport was a nationally significant infrastructure project.’
Local Government Lawyer, 10th February 2020
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘In a thorough judgment, which contains a careful and detailed analysis of the relevant statutory provisions, Holgate J accepts the Secretary of State’s submission that Article 7 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 permits applicants and local planning authorities to agree extensions of time for the determination of such applications in writing. In doing so, he expressly disapproves of the decision of Mr Mark Ockelton (sitting as a Deputy Judge of the High Court) in R (Warren Farm (Wokingham) Limited) v Wokingham Borough Council [2019] EWHC 2007 (Admin), which he has held “should not be followed”.’
Francis Taylor Building, 31st January 2020
Source: www.ftbchambers.co.uk
‘The High Court has ruled that prior-approval time limits can be extended by agreement. Charles Streeten explains why.’
Local Government Lawyer, 7th February 2020
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘This issue in this appeal was whether the local planning authority, properly understood the meaning of the word “openness” in the national planning policies applying to mineral working in the Green Belt, as expressed in the National Planning Policy Framework.’
UKSC Blog, 5th February 2020
Source: ukscblog.com
‘The Supreme Court will next week hand down its ruling on whether a county council misapplied a key provision in the National Planning Policy Framework on the preservation of “the openness of the Green Belt”.’
Local Government Lawyer, 31st January 2020
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘Wind turbines can evoke strong feelings. To some they are vital and eye-catching sources of renewable energy. To others they are simply bird- and insect-destroying eyesores. But in granting planning consent, can a local authority have regard to a proposed annual donation to a local community fund? Would this be a material planning consideration? No, said the Supreme Court on 20 November in R (Wright) v Resilient Energy Severndale Ltd and Forest of Dean District Council [2019] UKSC 53. Lord Sales gave the judgment with which Lady Hale, Lord Reed, Lord Lloyd-Jones and Lord Thomas agreed.’
Law Society's Gazette, 3rd January 2020
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
‘The UK government is being sued for approving a large new gas-fired power plant, overruling the climate change objections of its own planning authority.
The plant, being developed by Drax in north Yorkshire, would become the biggest gas power station in Europe and could produce 75% of the UK’s power sector emissions when fully operational, according to the environmental lawyers ClientEarth, who have brought the judicial review.’
The Guardian, 30th January 2020
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘Planning analysis: In Haden v Shropshire Council, the High Court rejected a legal challenge to a local planning authority’s (LPA’s) decision to grant planning permission for development of a sand and gravel quarry in the green belt. Nina Pindham, a barrister at No5 Barristers’ Chambers and counsel for the defendant, considers the case and its implications.’
No. 5 Chambers, 23rd January 2020
Source: www.no5.com
© Inner Temple Library 2020