Where Lidl and Aldi had each applied for planning permission to develop a discount supermarket on different parcels of land outside a Town Centre, but within the same settlement, it had been unlawful for the LPA to have granted planning permission to Aldi without comparing its proposal to that of Lidl. The need to undertake a comparison is a ” material consideration” only if it is so obviously material that it would be irrational not to assess it. However, here that high threshold was met on the facts so held in LIDL v EAST LINDSEY DC (2024) EWHC 1641 ( Admin ).
Subscribe
Get an email when we publish a new post on this blog. We’ll never share your email and you can unsubscribe any time. Our use of your details is explained in ourĀ privacy policy.
"*" indicates required fields
Headings
- Best Value (13)
- Capital Finance and Companies (54)
- Council Tax and Rates (74)
- Decision making and Contracts (264)
- Elections and Bylaws (33)
- Environment, Highways and Leisure (117)
- General (17)
- Housing (147)
- Human Rights and Public Sector Equality Duty (104)
- Judicial Control, Liability and Litigation (218)
- Land, Goods and Services (73)
- Local Authority Powers (74)
- Non Judicial Control (21)
- Planning and Environmental (153)
- Social Care (74)
- Standards (23)
Disclaimer
This blog is maintained for information purposes only. It is not intended to be a source of legal advice and must not be relied upon as such. Blog posts reflect the views and opinions of their individual authors, not of chambers as a whole.
Comments are closed.
11KBW, 11 King’s Bench Walk, Temple, London EC4Y 7EQ | Tel: 020 7632 8500
Privacy | Terms & Conditions | © 11KBW 2024
Privacy | Terms & Conditions | © 11KBW 2024