Health & Safety Executive v Wolverhampton County Council

[2010] EWCA Civ 1025

Case details

Case citations
[2010] EWCA Civ 1025
Court
Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
Judgment date
30 July 2010
Judgment text

This feature is available to zoomLaw Pro members.

Subjects
Administrative Planning law Relevant considerations
Keywords
planning decision relevant considerations compensation liability Town and Country Planning Act 1990 section 97 section 102 permission to appeal
Outcome
appeal allowed (decision to be remade under section 97; costs reserved; permission to appeal to the supreme court granted)
Judicial consideration

This feature is available to zoomLaw Pro members.

Summary

The appeal concerned whether potential liability to compensation is a relevant consideration when a public authority makes a planning decision under sections 97 or 102 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and ordered the authority to remake its section 97 decision. The issue was considered to be of wider importance and to involve a clear division of judicial opinion, so permission to appeal to the Supreme Court was granted. The supplied text does not include the approved judgment containing the court’s detailed analysis.

Factual background

The Health and Safety Executive appealed from a decision of the Queen’s Bench Division, Administrative Court, before Mr Justice Collins. The appeal concerned the respondent council’s decision under section 97 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, and whether potential liability to compensation under section 97 or section 102 was a relevant consideration. The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, ordered the decision to be remade, and granted permission to appeal to the Supreme Court.

Held

Disposition. The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and ordered the respondent to remake its decision under section 97 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

  1. Issue identified. The court stated that the question of wider importance was whether the council’s potential liability to compensation, when making a decision under section 97 or section 102, was a relevant consideration.
  2. Further appeal. Permission to appeal to the Supreme Court was granted because the issue was of wider importance and there was a clear division of judicial opinion.
  3. Costs. The court did not determine costs at the hearing. The issue was reserved for determination in writing.

The supplied material records the operative order but does not contain the approved judgment referred to by Lord Justice Sullivan. It therefore does not provide the detailed statutory reasoning or a fuller statement of the court’s conclusion on the relevant-consideration issue.

The court’s approach to earlier authorities

This feature is available to zoomLaw Pro members.

Appellate history

  • Court of Appeal (Civil Division): Appeal allowed. The respondent was ordered to remake its decision under section 97 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. Permission to appeal to the Supreme Court was granted.
  • Queen’s Bench Division, Administrative Court (Mr Justice Collins): Judgment appealed from; no citation is stated in the judgment.

Lower court decision

Judgment appealed:
Not stated in the judgment
Outcome:
appeal allowed (decision to be remade under section 97; costs reserved; permission to appeal to the supreme court granted)

Key cases cited

This feature is available to zoomLaw Pro members.

Cases citing this case

This feature is available to zoomLaw Pro members.