Trustees of the Boulder Bridge Lane Trust v Barnsley Metropolitan Borough Council
Decision date: 14 March 2017
Neutral citation: [2017] UKUT 81 (LC)
Overall AI summary confidence: high
Short overview
This short overview is intended to summarise the case, issues and outcome so far as they are supported by the judgment.
AI confidence in this short overview: high
This appeal concerned a Trustees' challenge to a negative certificate of appropriate alternative development (CAAD) issued by Barnsley MBC in relation to land compulsorily purchased in December 1985. The Tribunal held the Council had applied the wrong planning policy date and that the pre-6 April 2012 framework (policy as at publication of the CPO) governs the CAAD; it found that several alternative uses (fuel recovery with progressive restoration, limited inert fill, scrap yard) would have been permitted in 1985 and that a former railway building north of Shaw Lane would also have been granted permission for commercial re-use in December 1985. The Council accepted it should have issued a positive CAAD for the agreed uses; remaining issues concern certain planning conditions (notably restoration timing).
Ratio decidendi
This summary is intended to identify the ratio decidendi, meaning the legal reasons for deciding and the binding part of the decision.
AI confidence in this ratio decidendi summary: medium
The binding conclusions that can safely be identified are: (1) where a CPO was made before 6 April 2012, a CAAD must be assessed by reference to the planning policies and circumstances as at the date the CPO was published; and (2) in the pre-2012 context, very special circumstances (including preventing dereliction and facilitating environmental improvement) can justify permitting a commercial change of use of an existing building in the Green Belt when that outcome would otherwise be inevitable.
Obiter dicta
This summary is intended to identify obiter dicta, meaning observations made by the way that were not necessary to deciding the case and are not binding.
AI confidence in this obiter dicta summary: medium
The judgment contains non-binding observations to the effect that, where plan mapping is imprecise, Green Belt boundaries may be treated as intended to follow former statutory undertaker freehold boundaries, and that local planning authorities may properly make concessions where refusal would thwart environmental improvement and leave buildings derelict.