Hayle Town Council, R (on the application of) v The Cornwall Council
[2023] EWHC 389 (Admin)
Christine Pratt & Anor, R (on the application of) v Exeter City Council
2 February 2024
[2024] EWHC 185 (Admin)
High Court
A council approved building plans for many new houses, but didn't properly check how the new road would affect existing neighbours or consider using a planned alternative road. The court said the council made a mistake and needs to reconsider the building plans properly.
Key Facts
- •Exeter City Council granted outline planning permission for 350 dwellings, with access via Old Rydon Lane.
- •Claimants challenged the decision, arguing the council failed to assess the impact on existing residents and misrepresented the availability of alternative access.
- •The council conceded unlawfulness on two grounds, while the interested party addressed a third.
- •The case centered on the council's duty to consider material planning considerations and the adequacy of its investigation (Tameside duty).
Legal Principles
Planning judgment and weighing of issues are for the decision-maker, not the court.
Seddon Properties Ltd v Secretary of State for the Environment (1981) 42 P & CR 26
Decisions must be made in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise.
Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004
Sufficient inquiry duty (Tameside duty): Decision-makers must take reasonable steps to acquire relevant information.
Secretary of State for Education and Science v Tameside MBC [1977] AC 1014
Material considerations: Decision-makers must consider considerations expressly or impliedly identified by statute, or those 'obviously material'.
R (Friends of the Earth Ltd & Ors) v Heathrow Airport Ltd [2020] UKSC 52
Irrationality/unreasonableness: A decision is unlawful if it's outside the range of reasonable decisions.
Associated Picture Houses Ltd v Wednesbury Corpn [1948] 1 KB 223
Challenges to planning officer reports: The court will intervene only if the advice materially misled the committee and affected the decision.
R (Mansell) v Tonbridge & Malling BC [2019] PTSR 1452
Highway authority consultation response is amenable to judicial review.
R (Swainsthorpe Parish Council v Norfolk County Council [2021] EWHC 1014 (Admin)
Section 122 Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984: Highways authorities must consider access to premises and amenity impacts.
Section 122 Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984
Outcomes
Claim succeeded on Grounds 1 and 2.
The council failed to assess the impact of the access scheme on residents and misrepresented the availability of alternative access, breaching its duty to consider material considerations and its Tameside duty.
Grounds 3 and 4 were not pursued.
The interested party provided a unilateral undertaking to address the defect identified in Ground 3, rendering Ground 4 moot.
Similar Cases
Bedford Park Developments v Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities & Anor
[2024] EWHC 2337 (Admin)
Bredhurst Parish Council v Maidstone Borough Council & Ors
[2024] EWHC 2373 (Admin)
Carol Gurajena & Anor, R (on the application of) v London Borough of Newham
[2024] EWHC 1745 (Admin)
Sarah Moakes v Canterbury City Council
[2024] EWHC 1272 (Admin)