Weston Homes Plc, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities & Anor
[2024] EWHC 2089 (Admin)
Dr Caroline Rye v Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities & Ors
22 February 2024
[2024] EWHC 358 (Admin)
High Court
A planning permission was challenged because the inspector didn't know some trees had been cut down before she made her decision. The court agreed this was a big mistake that changed her decision, so the planning permission was cancelled.
Key Facts
- •Claim for statutory review under section 288 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
- •Challenge to planning permission granted on 6 December 2022 for the conversion and extension of The Queens Hotel, Selborne.
- •Ground 1: Allegation of material error of fact by the Inspector regarding felled trees on the site.
- •First Defendant (Secretary of State) consented to a quashing order on Ground 1.
- •Second Defendant contested the claim.
- •Significant number of mature trees were felled before the Inspector's site visit, despite being depicted as retained in the appeal proposal.
- •The Inspector's decision letter did not reference the tree works consent or the felling of the trees.
Legal Principles
Decisions of the Secretary of State and inspectors are to be construed flexibly; an inspector doesn't need to rehearse every argument.
Bloor Homes East Midlands Ltd. v. Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government and another [2014] EWHC 754 (Admin)
No duty for an Inspector to refer to each item of evidence or material consideration.
Bolton MDC v. Secretary of State for the Environment (1996) 71 P&CR 309
A s288 challenge fails if the decision-maker would have reached the same conclusion without the error.
Simplex (GE) Holdings v. Secretary of State for the Environment [1998] 3 PLR 25
Criteria for a material error of fact rendering a decision unlawful (E v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2004] EWCA Civ 49): (i) mistake to an existing fact; (ii) fact is uncontentious and objectively verifiable; (iii) Claimant not responsible for the mistake; (iv) mistake played a material part in the decision.
E v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2004] EWCA Civ 49
Outcomes
Planning permission quashed.
The Inspector made a material error of fact by failing to account for the felling of trees depicted as retained in the appeal proposal. This mistake played a material part in her decision regarding the impact on the character and appearance of the area.
Similar Cases
Friends of the West Oxfordshire Cotswolds, R (on the application of) v West Oxfordshire District Council
[2023] EWHC 901 (Admin)
Bedford Park Developments v Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities & Anor
[2024] EWHC 2337 (Admin)
Pyrosome Ltd v Secretary of State for Levelling Up Housing and Communities & Anor
[2023] EWHC 563 (Admin)
NRS Saredon Aggregates Limited v The Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities & Anor
[2023] EWHC 2795 (Admin)