Key Facts
- •Claimant seeks statutory review of Inspector's decision dismissing appeal against refusal of planning permission for caravan use on Green Belt land.
- •Claimant is an Irish Traveller living on the site with Mr. Cooper and their children.
- •Council lacked a 5-year supply of traveller sites.
- •Inspector refused both permanent and temporary planning permission.
- •Claimant challenges the decision on grounds of irrationality, disproportionality, failure to consider children's best interests, and flawed balancing exercise.
Legal Principles
Statutory review decisions are construed flexibly; reasons must be intelligible and adequate, focusing on main controversial issues.
Bloor Homes East Midlands Limited v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government [2014] EWHC 754 (Admin)
Weight attached to material considerations is for the decision-maker; court intervention is limited to Wednesbury irrationality.
Bloor Homes East Midlands Limited v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government [2014] EWHC 754 (Admin)
Inspector's decision letter should be read fairly, as a whole, and in a straightforward manner.
South Lakeland v Secretary of State for the Environment [1992] 2 AC 141
Judicial review principles apply to section 288 TCPA 1990 challenges; Inspector must make a rational decision with adequate reasons.
Seddon Properties v Secretary of State for the Environment (1978) 42 P & CR 26
Rationality challenges cannot be used to contest planning merits; Wednesbury unreasonableness threshold is high in planning cases.
Newsmith v Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions [2001] EWHC Admin 74
Irrationality involves a decision incapable of justification or outside the range of reasonable decisions; flaws in reasoning process are also challengeable.
R(Law Society) v Lord Chancellor [2018] EWHC 2094 (Admin)
Proportionality test involves assessing objective importance, rational connection, less intrusive alternatives, and fair balance between individual and community interests.
Bank Mellat v HM Treasury [2013] UKSC 39
In Article 8 ECHR cases, interference must be necessary in a democratic society and proportionate to the social need.
Impacts on the Green Belt are matters of planning judgment, not law.
Samuel Smith Old Brewery v North Yorkshire County Council [2020] UKSC 3
The 'very special circumstances' test for Green Belt development is qualitative, not quantitative; the best interests of the child are a primary consideration, but not determinative.
Wychavon DC v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government [2008] EWCA Civ 692
Outcomes
Claim for statutory review dismissed.
Inspector's decision was a rational exercise of planning judgment, adequately reasoned and proportionate. The Claimant's challenges were essentially merits-based, impermissibly questioning the weight afforded to various factors.