The Noble Organisation, R (on the application of) v Thanet District Council & Ors, Court of Appeal - Administrative Court, November 12, 2004, [2004] EWHC 2576 (Admin)

Extract

---

The Noble Organisation, R (on the application of) v Thanet District Council & Ors, Court of Appeal - Administrative Court, November 12, 2004, [2004] EWHC 2576 (Admin)

Case No: CO/3843/04

Neutral Citation Number: [2004] EWHC 2576 (Admin)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE

QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION

ADMINISTRATIVE COURT

Royal Courts of Justice

Strand, London, WC2A 2LL

Friday, 12 November 2004

Before :

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE RICHARDS

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Between :

The Queen (on the application of The Noble Organisation)

Claimant

- and

Thanet District Council

Defendant

- and -

(1) Rose Farm Estates

(2) The Rank Group

Interested Parties

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

(Transcript of the Handed Down Judgment of

Smith Bernal Wordwave Limited, 190 Fleet Street

London EC4A 2AG

Tel No: 020 7421 4040, Fax No: 020 7831 8838

Official Shorthand Writers to the Court)

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Richard Phillips QC and James Pereira (instructed by S J Berwin) for the Claimant

Alice Robinson (instructed by Thanet District Council) for the Defendant

Christopher Katkowski QC and David Blundell (instructed by Richards Butler) for the Interested Parties

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Judgment

Mr Justice Richards :

1. The claimant challenges a decision of the defendant council dated 24 May 2004 granting reserved matters approval pursuant to an outline planning permission for leisure development on part of an area of land known as the EuroKent Business Park, Ramsgate. The claimant's essential case is that the council's decision not to require an environmental impact assessment (``EIA'') of the reserved matters was unlawful. The matter came before me as a renewed permission application. In the event, as explained below, I granted permission and treated the hearing as the substantive hearing, reserving my judgment at the close of the hearing.

The Facts

2. On 18 June 1997 outline planning permission was granted for a business park on a 53.65 hectare site. More specifically, the permission covered mixed use development for business and commerce, comprising use classes A2 (financial and professional premises in excess of 930 sq.m.), B1 (business), B2 (general industrial) and B8 (storage and distribution), together with recreational use associated with a particular recreation ground. The permission was a bare outline permission.

3. No EIA was carried out in relation to the proposed development. The claimant invites an inference that no consideration was given to the need for an EIA, but the evidence goes no further than to establish that no EIA was provided with the planning application, the council did not adv...

See the full content of this document

---