Latest News

HMRC and ICAEW Announcements - Landlords Take Note HMRC and ICAEW Announcements - Landlords Take Note
Service Charge Accounts - What Can You Do? Service Charge Accounts - What Can You Do?
Court Decides Limits of Expert's Responsibilities in Claim Court Decides Limits of Expert's Responsibilities in Claim
Vacant Possession Means What It Says Vacant Possession Means What It Says
Developer Pays Price For Unauthorised Demolition Developer Pays Price For Unauthorised Demolition
Construction Act Changes Construction Act Changes
Council Has Right to Adjourn if Information Insufficient Council Has Right to Adjourn if Information Insufficient
Indemnity Ineffective if Actual Liability Not Ascertained Indemnity Ineffective if Actual Liability Not Ascertained
Superior Clause in Contract Absolves Subcontractor Superior Clause in Contract Absolves Subcontractor
Demolition Requires Planning Permission Demolition Requires Planning Permission

Planning Permission for Re-Submitted Application Overturned on Appeal

Following a refusal of planning permission, it is far from unusual for the unsuccessful application to be amended and re-submitted in the hope that, the second time, the outcome will be different.

A recent case arose from this situation, after the second application was approved despite being substantially identical to the first. The planning officer who dealt with the second application was not aware of the first unsuccessful application and an appeal to have the permission quashed was launched to the Court of Appeal.

In considering the application, the Court held that if:

  • there had been a mistake in the record of the planning history for the application under consideration; and
  • the error was not the fault of the claimants; and
  • the error was uncontentious and objectively verifiable; and
  • the error was a material factor in the planning inspector’s reasoning;

then it was proper to adhere to the original decision. Accordingly, the original decision was upheld.

The reasoning for this is that it would be unfair to reverse the previous decision if there were no material change in the facts under consideration. To do so would render planning officers open to a continuing threat of judicial review of their decisions.

The contents of this article are intended for general information purposes only and shall not be deemed to be, or constitute legal advice. We cannot accept responsibility for any loss as a result of acts or omissions taken in respect of this article.