![AC-2024-LON-002558 - [2025] EWHC 2278 (Admin)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_fi51A75.png){kind=logo}
Ground 2 - failure to require sufficient information to allow a lawful decision on the application to be made
Ground 2 - failure to require sufficient information to allow a lawful decision on the application to be made
Claimant’s submissions
This ground related to more than just evidence about the size of the agricultural unit.
Mr Beglan submitted that the Officer, having identified what Mr Beglan characterised as “obvious deficiencies” in the Planning Statement and other application documents, nevertheless failed to request additional information that would have overcome those deficiencies. As a consequence, submitted Mr Beglan, “important questions directly related to the statutory question it had to answer” were unable to be answered by the Council in reaching its decision.
- Heading
- Introduction
- Background Facts
- These Proceedings
- Ground 1 - unlawful conclusion that the agricultural unit in question was at least 5 hectares
- Defendant’s submissions
- Ground 2 - failure to require sufficient information to allow a lawful decision on the application to be made
- Defendant’s submissions
- Ground 3: failure to take account of the potential impact of the development on the Bayford Wood ancient woodland
- Defendant’s submissions
- Ground 4: failure to take account of the potential impact of the development on the setting of the Claimant’s listed building
- Defendant’s submissions
- Discussion and conclusions
- Ground 2
- Grounds 3 and 4
- Aarhus costs protection
- Conclusions