Q A proposal otherwise in accordance with the local development plan has been rejected because the council has earmarked the site for what they consider to be an even more desirable purpose. Can such an objection be upheld, even where the council’s project has an even chance or less of being implemented within the time frame contemplated?
A Yes: although the likelihood of the pet project coming about is a highly material consideration, there is no justification for fettering the decision maker’s discretion with a non-statutory balance of probabilities test: see Nottinghamshire County Council v Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions [2001] EWHC Admin 293; [2001] EGCS 48, refusing to follow two unreported decisions that seemed to support such a test.
