Social Welfare Lawyers in the Centre of Birmingham

Traveller planning

Swale Borough Council v Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government and Maughan [2018] EWHC 3402 (Admin)

The case involved an application for planning permission by Travellers where a temporary permission was granted by a Planning Inspector.  The Council took one ground of challenge against this decision on the basis that the Inspector had erred in law in that, when referring to “a substantial shortfall”, he failed to determine the amount of the shortfall in the 5 year supply of Traveller sites.

Guildford BC v Cooper & Brazil

This site is in the Green Belt and an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB).  A previous enforcement notice and planning appeal had been dismissed by the Secretary of State in 2014.  Guildford Borough Council (GBC) then declined to determine subsequent planning applications made in 2017 and 2018.  So there was nothing in the pipeline in terms of any outstanding application/appeal when the injunction application was heard earlier this year.

Green Belt Planning Appeals

Connors & ors v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government (SSCLG); Mulvenna & Smith v SSCLG [2017] EWCA Civ 1850, 17 November 2017.

The case of Mulvenna and Smith concerned the discriminatory decision by Eric Pickles, back in 2014 when he was SSCLG, to recover their respective planning appeals for his own determination. Having done so Mr Pickles rejected his Planning Inspector’s recommendation in each case that planning permission be granted and he dismissed both appeals.

R (Jayes) -v- Flintshire CC

R (Jayes) -v- Flintshire CC and Hamilton (interested party) [2017] EWHC 874 (Admin) 13

Mr Hamilton obtained planning permission for a Gypsy site for a temporary period of not more than 5 years. A neighbouring objector challenged this on several grounds. Before C.M.G. Ockelton (sitting as a deputy high court judge), Mr Jayes was successful on his first ground and the Planning Inspector’s decision was quashed.