Developers are to resume work at Sugden’s Mill project in Brighouse, west Yorkshire following an Appeal Court decision to dismiss an opposing application brought by the site’s owner.
Younger Homes (Northern) had challenged plans for a retail and leisure centre on the 9.3-acre (3.77 ha) property, claiming that the environmental effects of the scheme had not been properly investigated.
However, three appeal judges have refused to overturn the decision on the basis that it had not been shown to have caused the company “substantial prejudice”.
The ruling means that work on the retail development, which had come to a standstill pending the Appeal Court’s decision, will now continue.
The inspector had granted a group of developers outline planning permission for the construction of a 23,000 sq ft (2,137 sq m) retail area, a public swimming pool, 350 parking spaces, a pedestrian footbridge and a new road bridge on the site.
After Younger Homes purchased a substantial part of the property from one of the developers in March 2002, it sought permission to build a residential complex on the site. However, the inspector refused to reopen his inquiry.
The company subsequently brought proceedings to challenge the initial grant of permission.
It claimed that the inspector, in fulfilling his duty to determine whether to subject the application to an environmental impact assessment, had relied upon an “unsigned, undated, untitled, anonymous ‘screening opinion’” produced by a planning officer at Calderdale council.
The Court of Appeal has now held that, because Younger Homes had not demonstrated “substantial prejudice”, a requirement of the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (England and Wales) Regulations 1999, the decision to grant planning permission could not be challenged.
The court also found that the inspector’s failure to comply with procedures laid down in the regulations did not render his decision invalid.
Younger Homes (Northern) Ltd v First Secretary of State and another Court of Appeal (Dame Elizabeth Butler-Sloss, Laws and Wall LJJ) 30 June 2004.
Richard Harwood (instructed by Eaton Smith, of Huddersfield) appeared for the claimant; John Litton and Tim Mould (instructed by the Treasury Solicitor) appeared for the first defendant; Vincent Fraser QC (instructed by the solicitor to Calderdale Metropolitan District Council) appeared for the second defendants.
References: EGi Legal News 2/07/04
