Plans for the radical redevelopment of Oxford’s Westgate Shopping Centre may now go ahead after the High Court ordered the First Secretary of State to rethink his refusal of permission for the scheme.
Harrison J has quashed the First Secretary of State’s decision to refuse planning permission for the redevelopment, which would involve an extra 39,000m² of retail floorspace.
The judge allowed an appeal by Oxford City Council and the developer, Westgate Partnership, to the Secretary of State’s finding that the scheme would damage Oxford’s skyline.
The judge said: “One can understand Westgate feeling aggrieved by the decision, because the council were in favour of the development and the inspector had recommended in favour of it. But the Secretary of State was, of course, entitled to disagree with his inspector’s recommendations. The question is whether the Secretary of State was acting outside of his powers in so doing.”
He went on to find that the Secretary of State had erred in law in several respects, criticising him for failing to give adequate reasons for a number of key findings that led to his decision, in particular where he made findings that were contrary to his own planning inspector’s recommendations.
“The Secretary of State’s conclusion that he had reservations about the economic effect of the development on Oxford town centre and other local centres was not based upon any evidence. Indeed, it is contrary to the unchallenged evidence given at the inquiry and contrary to the inspector’s conclusions. No reasons were given for the Secretary of State’s reservations, nor were any reasons given for disagreeing with the inspector’s conclusions,” he said.
“The Secretary of State failed to come to any conclusion on the issue of need for the amount and quality of retail floorspace proposed. In my view, it behoved the Secretary of State to deal with that aspect in a meaningful way rather than to say that he had reservations about it. He failed to give reasons as to why he disagreed with his inspector’s findings, and he failed to come to a conclusion as to the retail benefits of the development.
“He therefore failed to reach a conclusion on a matter that was of prime importance to the applicants’ case, and which would have constituted an important benefit to weigh in the balance against the conservation objection.”
Westgate Partnership v First Secretary of State; Oxford City Council v First Secretary of State Queen’s Bench Division (Harrison J) 28 February 2003.
References: PLS News 03/03/03
