Lullington Solar Park Ltd v Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities & Anor
[2024] EWHC 295 (Admin)
Robert Hunter v Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing & Communities & Anor
5 May 2023
[2023] EWHC 1068 (Admin)
High Court
A farmer wanted a temporary home on his land to help with his expanding cow herd. A planning official said no because his business plan wasn't convincing enough to show his farm would make money. The farmer challenged the decision in court, but the judge agreed with the official, saying the official had good reason to doubt the farm's future profitability. The court case wasn't about whether the farm was good or bad, just whether the official made a legal mistake – and they didn't.
Key Facts
- •Robert Hunter challenged a planning inspector's decision refusing his application for a temporary dwelling on agricultural land.
- •The application was for a 3-year temporary dwelling to house Hunter, a farmer, and his family, to support his expanding cattle herd.
- •Buckinghamshire Council initially failed to determine the application within the statutory period, leading to Hunter's appeal.
- •The appeal was dismissed by the inspector primarily due to concerns about the financial viability of Hunter's business plan.
- •Hunter's judicial review challenge focused on the inspector's assessment of financial viability.
Legal Principles
Judicial review of planning inspector decisions requires a flexible construction of decision letters; reasons must be intelligible and adequate, addressing principal controversial issues.
St Modwen Developments Limited v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government [2018] PTSR 746 at [6]-[7]
The weight attached to material considerations is the decision-maker's exclusive jurisdiction, not the court's. Merits review is not permitted.
St Modwen Developments Limited v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government [2018] PTSR 746 at [6]-[7]
Planning policies are interpreted objectively by the court; application of policy is for the decision-maker. Misunderstanding or misapplication of policy constitutes error of law.
St Modwen Developments Limited v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government [2018] PTSR 746 at [6]-[7]
Section 288 of the Town & Country Planning Act 1990 allows challenges to the validity of actions of the Secretary of State, requiring leave of the High Court.
Town & Country Planning Act 1990, section 288
Outcomes
The claim was dismissed.
The inspector's conclusion regarding the lack of financial viability was a permissible exercise of judgment based on the evidence. Hunter failed to demonstrate legal error, not simply disagreement with the inspector's assessment of the facts.
Similar Cases
Bedford Park Developments v Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities & Anor
[2024] EWHC 2337 (Admin)
Timothy James House & Anor v Waverley Borough Council & Anor
[2023] EWHC 3011 (Admin)
Mid Suffolk District Council v Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities & Anor
[2024] EWHC 930 (Admin)
Bramley Solar Farm Residents Group v Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities & Ors
[2023] EWHC 2842 (Admin)