Legislation requires that every application for planning permission receives adequate publicity in addition to formal notice of it being served on all affected landowners. Applications are usually publicised by the local planning authority by means of a site notice, by notification to the adjoining owner or occupier, and in some cases an advertisement in a local newspaper. Objections must be submitted within the period specified, at least 21 days from the date of the notice; although local planning authorities usually consider letters of objection submitted outside this period provided that they are received prior to the application being determined. The statutory consultation exercise is usually carried out simultaneously.
The High Court recently considered an application for judicial review where a local planning authority had failed to take into account an objection submitted outside the requisite period.
In R (on the application of Weir) v Camden London Borough Council, [2005] EWHC 1875 (Admin); [2005] PLSCS 161, the defendant was the local planning authority for a property that was to be converted into a restaurant. The council boundary ran along the middle of the road. The claimant was the neighbouring local planning authority, which opposed the application on the ground of possible harm to residential amenity, an increase in pedestrian congestion in the street and other highway issues. A third party also objected to the scheme on similar grounds. The planning committee, unaware of the objections, granted planning permission. The claimant contended that the defendants had failed to have regard to a material consideration, namely the neighbouring local planning authority’s objection.
The court agreed with the claimant and held that there had been a failure to have regard to that objection and that there was no guarantee that in view of the error the decision would have been the same. Accordingly, the planning permission was quashed.
In this instance, the failure by the local planning authority to submit their objection within the requisite period resulted in the claimant being put to the expense of mounting a High Court challenge; a useful reminder to objectors and consultees alike of the importance of submitting objections within the specified time period.
Weir also raises the question of whether a court will be prepared to quash a grant of planning permission where objections have been submitted some considerable time outside the authorised period, potentially prejudicing a developer or landowner whose planning permission is quashed some considerable time after it was initially granted.
Gill Castorina is an associate at Paul, Hastings, Janofsky & Walker (Europe) LLP
Legislation requires that every application for planning permission receives adequate publicity in addition to formal notice of it being served on all affected landowners. Applications are usually publicised by the local planning authority by means of a site notice, by notification to the adjoining owner or occupier, and in some cases an advertisement in a local newspaper. Objections must be submitted within the period specified, at least 21 days from the date of the notice; although local planning authorities usually consider letters of objection submitted outside this period provided that they are received prior to the application being determined. The statutory consultation exercise is usually carried out simultaneously.
The High Court recently considered an application for judicial review where a local planning authority had failed to take into account an objection submitted outside the requisite period.
In R (on the application of Weir) v Camden London Borough Council, [2005] EWHC 1875 (Admin); [2005] PLSCS 161, the defendant was the local planning authority for a property that was to be converted into a restaurant. The council boundary ran along the middle of the road. The claimant was the neighbouring local planning authority, which opposed the application on the ground of possible harm to residential amenity, an increase in pedestrian congestion in the street and other highway issues. A third party also objected to the scheme on similar grounds. The planning committee, unaware of the objections, granted planning permission. The claimant contended that the defendants had failed to have regard to a material consideration, namely the neighbouring local planning authority’s objection.
The court agreed with the claimant and held that there had been a failure to have regard to that objection and that there was no guarantee that in view of the error the decision would have been the same. Accordingly, the planning permission was quashed.
In this instance, the failure by the local planning authority to submit their objection within the requisite period resulted in the claimant being put to the expense of mounting a High Court challenge; a useful reminder to objectors and consultees alike of the importance of submitting objections within the specified time period.
Weir also raises the question of whether a court will be prepared to quash a grant of planning permission where objections have been submitted some considerable time outside the authorised period, potentially prejudicing a developer or landowner whose planning permission is quashed some considerable time after it was initially granted.
Gill Castorina is an associate at Paul, Hastings, Janofsky & Walker (Europe) LLP
