Bedford Park Developments v Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities & Anor
[2024] EWHC 2337 (Admin)
Elizabeth Soilleux v Secretary of State for Levelling Up Housing and Communities
2 February 2023
[2023] EWHC 204 (Admin)
High Court
Someone challenged the approval of building houses near their home, saying it would increase flooding. The judge said it was too late to challenge the original decision because too much time had passed, and the person who made the final decision already looked into the flooding concerns. The challenge was rejected.
Key Facts
- •Linked claims for judicial review and statutory review concerning outline planning permission (S/0202/17/OL) for 110 dwellings and subsequent reserved matters approval (APP/W0530/W/22/3291523).
- •Claims commenced on July 19, 2022, targeting the local authority's October 26, 2017, grant of outline planning permission and the Secretary of State's June 10, 2022, approval of reserved matters.
- •Key issue: increased risk of off-site flooding due to development, as shown in flood modelling (Figure 4.7/4.3 comparison).
- •Claimant argues misappreciation of flood risk by the local authority and misstatement by Castlefield (developer).
- •Claimant contends Inspector erred in law by not requiring replication of the modelled landform to secure flood risk acceptability.
Legal Principles
Test for departure from outline planning permission: 'significant respect' (Heron Corporation v Manchester City Council).
Heron Corporation v Manchester City Council [1978] 1 WLR 937 at 944C-D
Interpretation of planning conditions: objective correct interpretation (R (Swire) v Canterbury City Council).
R (Swire) v Canterbury City Council [2022] EWHC 390 (Admin)
Flood risk definition: combination of probability and potential consequences (National Planning Policy Framework §167, National Planning Policy Guidance).
National Planning Policy Framework §167, National Planning Policy Guidance
Judicial review: delay is a discretionary bar, especially when exceeding the six-week timeframe (CPR 54.5(5)).
Civil Procedure Rules 54.5(5)
Outcomes
Permission for judicial review refused.
Extreme delay (nearly five years), lack of concealment despite available modelling data, and the Inspector's consideration of flood risk on planning merits.
Leave for statutory review refused.
Inspector's approach to the Parameters Plan, flood risk, and betterment was within the realm of planning judgment and did not constitute errors of law.
Similar Cases
Pyrosome Ltd v Secretary of State for Levelling Up Housing and Communities & Anor
[2023] EWHC 563 (Admin)
Mid Suffolk District Council v Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities & Anor
[2024] EWHC 930 (Admin)
Timothy James House & Anor v Waverley Borough Council & Anor
[2023] EWHC 3011 (Admin)
Paul Evans v Bridgend County Borough Council
[2024] EWHC 2607 (Admin)