R (Martin Grant Homes Ltd and Another) v Wealden District Council

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
Judgment Date04 March 2005
Neutral Citation[2005] EWHC 453 (Admin)
Date04 March 2005
CourtQueen's Bench Division (Administrative Court)

QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION

Before Mr Justice Collins

Regina (Martin Grant Homes Ltd and Another)
and
Wealden District Council

Planning - statutory planning process - council must follow transitional provisions

Council must follow transitional provisions

Where, before the coming into force of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, a local planning authority had published proposals for the replacement of its local plan, had deposited those plans for inspection and had received representations which necessitated a local inquiry under the previous statutory scheme, the authority was not entitled to abandon the proposed new local plan, but was required to proceed with the statutory planning process.

Mr Justice Collins so held in a reserved judgment in the Queen's Bench Division, granting a judicial review claim by Martin Grant Homes Ltd and Taylor Woodrow Developments Ltd and quashing the decision of Wealden District Council on May 19, 2004 to abandon its emerging draft local plan.

Mr Peter Village, QC and Mr Robert White for the claimants; Mr Richard Drabble, QC and Mr James Maurici for the council.

MR JUSTICE COLLINS said that the relevant provisions of the 2004 Act came into force on September 29, 2004. The transitional provisions in paragraphs 8, 9 and 10 of Schedule 8 to the 2004 Act were of central importance.

They provided that if an emerging local plan had not reached the stage where, in accordance with section 40(2) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, copies had been made available for inspection, the process had to be halted: see paragraph 8.

If the authority was not required to conduct an inquiry under section 42(1) of the 1990 Act, or before the commencement of Part 2 of the 2004 Act an inspector had been appointed to hold an inquiry, then the local planning process continued under Chapter 2 of Part 2 of the 1990 Act: see paragraph 9. That was not the position in the present case because no inspector had yet been appointed.

Paragraph 10 was material in the present case, with the result that Chapter 2 of Part 2 of the 1990 Act continued to have effect subject to the modifications in subparagraphs...

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 cases
  • Forde v Birmingham City Council
    • United Kingdom
    • Senior Court Costs Office
    • Invalid date
    ...the Council and the only argument left in her case was about the level of compensation she would receive. In ( Begum v Klari Times Law Reports 18 March 2005) Brooke LJ had expressed concern about the inflated level of the success fee claimed at 70% in a case where success was a near certain......
  • Queen v Lord Advocate
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Session (Inner House)
    • 22 April 2020
    ...1184; [2005] 2 All ER 369; [2005] HRLR 18; [2005] UKHRR 584; [2005] Po LR 8; [2006] Crim LR 87; (2005) 155 NLJ 467; 149 SJLB 360; The Times, 18 March 2005 S v Miller 2001 SC 977; 2001 SLT 531; [2001] UKHRR 514 Schmautzer v Austria (A/328-A) [1995] ECHR 40; (1996) 21 EHRR 511 Textbooks etc r......
  • R (Martin Grant Homes Ltd and Another) v Wealden District Council
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 31 October 2005
    ...Appeal so held in a reserved judgment allowing the appeal of Wealden District Council against the decision of Mr Justice Collins (The Times March 18, 2005) when he (i) granted a claim for judicial review by housing development companies, Martin Grant Homes Ltd and Taylor Woodrow Development......
7 books & journal articles

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT