Take the case of a neighbour (or perhaps a competitor) who has obtained a planning permission notwithstanding various objections carefully penned by you.
The lesson to be learnt from R (on the application of Carlton-Conway v Harrow London Borough Council [2002] 26 EG 138 (CS) is that you may have more ammunition for judicial review if the decision is one of the 400,000 taken each year by a planning officer under powers delegated to him by a scheme made by the council under section 101 of the Local Government Act 1972.
The greater possibility of error arises because the officer (unlike a planning committee) has to decide whether he alone can properly act as decision maker. In Carlton-Conway, the successful challenge was directed at the officer’s failure to take a hard look at the somewhat nebulous criteria laid down in the delegation plan.
Take the case of a neighbour (or perhaps a competitor) who has obtained a planning permission notwithstanding various objections carefully penned by you.
The lesson to be learnt from R (on the application of Carlton-Conway v Harrow London Borough Council [2002] 26 EG 138 (CS) is that you may have more ammunition for judicial review if the decision is one of the 400,000 taken each year by a planning officer under powers delegated to him by a scheme made by the council under section 101 of the Local Government Act 1972.
The greater possibility of error arises because the officer (unlike a planning committee) has to decide whether he alone can properly act as decision maker. In Carlton-Conway, the successful challenge was directed at the officer’s failure to take a hard look at the somewhat nebulous criteria laid down in the delegation plan.
