R v Secretary of State for the Environment, ex parte Hillingdon London Borough Council
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 26 November 1991 |
| Date | 26 November 1991 |
| Court | Queen's Bench Division |
Queen's Bench Division
Before Mr Justice Popplewell
Planning - time-limit - grant of subsequent extension - no ministerial power
Once the six-month time limit for an applicant to make a claim for compensation for loss or damage directly attributable to a prohibition contained in a stop notice had expired, the secretary of state had no power to extend that period, although he did have power, before the expiry of that period, to extend it.
Mr Justice Popplewell so held in the Queen's Bench Division in allowing an application for judicial review by the London Borough of Hillingdon against the decision of the Secretary of State for the Environment contained in a letter dated November 13, 1989, which purported to extend the period in regulation 14(2) of the Town and Country Planning General Regulation (SI 1976 No 1419) within which an application for compensation could be made under section 177 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1971.
Hillingdon Borough Council had issued an enforcement notice under section 87 of the 1971 Act alleging that works carried out by Novotel (Jersey) Ltd were unauthorised in that the work had not commenced within two years of the planning permission having been granted. The council had therefore issued a stop notice under section 90 of the 1971 Act seeking cessation of the work.
Following an appeal by Novotel against the enforcement notice, the inspector appointed by the secretary of state quashed the enforcement notice thereby also quashing the stop notice.
As Novotel had made a successful application to the secretary of state for an extension of time for serving a claim for compensation pursuant to the proviso to regulation 14 of the 1976 Regulations they then applied to the council seeking compensation under section 177 of the 1971 Act for loss or damage directly attributable to the prohibition contained in the stop notice.
In the meantime, the council's application to the High Court under section 246 of the 1971 Act against the decision of the secretary of state purporting to extend the time period for the purpose of regulation 14 of the 1976 Regulations, was dismissed.
Mr Peter Boydell, QC and Mr Charles George for the council; Mr William Hicks for the secretary of state; Mr Lionel Read, QC and Mr J William Upton for Novotel.
MR JUSTICE POPPLEWELL said that the issue was...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
R v Monopolies and Mergers Commission, ex parte Argyll Group Plc
... ... Commission and The Secretary of State for Trade and Industry Ex parte ... Justice and 2 New Square, Lincoln's Inn, London, W.C.2.) ... MR. A. HEYMAN, Q.C., ... Derby County Council (1981) 1 W.L.R 173 , and the cases there ... Secretary of State for the Environment, ex parte Hillingdon (1986) 1 W.L.R. 192 , ... ...
-
West Glamorgan County Council v Rafferty
... ... The Matter of Regina and Secretary of State For Wales and The West Glamorgan County Council Ex Parte Gilhaney [1986] EWCA Civ J0522-4 ... Justice and 2 New Square, Lincoln's Inn, London WC2A 3RU. Tel: 01 405 9884/5) ... v. Secretary of State for the Environment, ex parte Hillingdon London Borough Council , ... ...
-
R (S" & "B") v Birmingham City Council Independent Appeal Panel
...must be a delegation which is authorised by statute. For example, in R v Secretary of State for the Environment, ex parte Hillingdon LBC [1986] 1 WLR 192, approved by the Court of Appeal, the court considered a statutory power in a council to delegate to a committee. It held that it was ult......
- Leong Sang v Dato' Chu Ah Nge, Presiden Kelab Diraja Selangor