17. The cause that underlies the claim, brought pursuant to section 187B, namely breach of planning control, is not one on which the court can adjudicate. The court is not entitled to reach its own independent view on the planning merits of the case. The decision as to whether something is or is not a breach of planning control is a matter for the local planning authority or the Secretary of State on appeal and not the court, as confirmed by the House of Lords in South Buckinghamshire District Council v Porter and another [2003] UKHL 26; [2003] 2 AC 558 (" Porter ") at paragraphs 11, 20, 29 and 30.
18. At paragraph 29 in Porter , Lord Bingham said that the discretion must be exercised judicially, meaning in this context:
"…that the power must be exercised with due regard to the purpose for which the power was conferred: to restrain actual and threatened breaches of planning control. The power exists above all to permit abuses to be curbed and urgent solutions provided where these are called for."
19. The Local Government Act 1972 at section 222 above referred to provides:
"(1) Where a local authority consider it expedient for the promotion or protection of the interests of the inhabitants of their area—
(a) they may prosecute or defend or appear in any legal proceedings and, in the case of civil proceedings, may institute them in their own name, and (b) they may, in their own name, make representations in the interests of the inhabitants at any public inquiry held by or on behalf of any Minister or public body under any enactment."
20. Section 222 does not create a cause of action. It confers on local authorities the power to bring proceedings to enforce obedience to public law without the involvement of the Attorney General: see Stoke-on-Trent City Council v B&Q (Retail) Limited [1984] AC 754.
Epiq Europe Ltd, Lower Ground, 46 Chancery Lane, London WC2A 1JE www.epiqglobal.com/en-gb/
244
Made with FlippingBook interactive PDF creator