![AC-2024-LDS-000251 - [2025] EWHC 2256 (Admin)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_fi51A75.png){kind=logo}
The present challenge
The present challenge
This challenge, apart from the proposed new fifth ground, was then brought on about 25 November 2024. Ms Noémi Byrd of counsel had by then been instructed and settled the four grounds of challenge, in line with the pre-action protocol letter. Supporting evidence included a statement of the financial resources available to the claimant, this being an Aarhus Convention claim.
On 19 and 20 December 2024, the LPA and the developer filed their acknowledgement of service and summary grounds of resistance. These largely reiterated the position of the LPA in its response to the pre-action protocol letter, adding that the developer had entered into a supplementary planning obligation along the lines suggested in the LPA’s response.
- Heading
- Introduction
- The Facts
- Objections to the proposals
- The 8 December 2022 committee meeting
- Events after the meeting of 8 December 2022
- The Greenfields case at first instance
- The section 106 agreement
- The decision challenged
- Publication of the section 106 agreement
- Pre-action correspondence
- The present challenge
- The first supplementary planning obligation
- The order granting permission on the third and fourth grounds
- The second supplementary planning obligation
- The combined provisions of SPO (1) and SPO (2)
- The Greenfields case in the Court of Appeal
- The application to add a fifth ground of challenge
- The Issues, Reasoning and Conclusions
- Third ground: taking future ecological surveys into account without sight of the relevant condition; or that the ecology conditions which were imposed were ineffective
- Fourth ground: taking into account an inaccurate Biodiversity Net Gain (BNG) assessment and/or issuing a decision notice without legally adequate provision to secure BNG
- Fifth ground (subject to permission to amend): failing to publish the section 106 agreement in accordance with article 40(3)(b) of the 2015 DMP Order, rendering the grant of planning permission invali
- Conclusions