Following rejection in the High Court, the claimant argued that the council's decision was perverse and that it failed to give adequate reasons in granting permission in 2007. In response, the council submitted a planning officer's report setting out very special circumstances that applied to the proposal. These included a lack of alternative sites, the need for the business to be sited in the countryside and the boost to the local economy.
Lord Justice Sullivan agreed that the local authority had been properly advised on green belt policy and the need for the applicant to demonstrate very special circumstances. The council needed to give "summary reasons" for its decision, he ruled. He saw no reason to suppose that councillors had forgotten the need for a balancing exercise in approving inappropriate green belt development.
Siraj v Kirklees Council
Date 21 October 2010