Cases - Tesco Stores Ltd v Secretary of State for the Environment and West Oxfordshire District Council
Record details
- Name
- Tesco Stores Ltd v Secretary of State for the Environment and West Oxfordshire District Council
- Date
- [1995]
- Citation
- 2 AII ER 636
- Legislation
- Keywords
- Planning control
- Summary
-
Tesco offered to fully fund the building of a new road to relieve severe traffic congestion, at a cost of £6.6m, if they were granted permission for a retail superstore. (There was no point in offering partial funding, for the road would not get built.) The Secretary of State refused permission. Tesco appealed on the basis that he had ignored a material consideration, namely their offer of funding.
The House of Lords held that the Secretary of State had not ignored the offer to fund the road but, because of the tenuous link with the superstore, had given it little weight.
'An offered planning obligation which has nothing to do with the proposed development, apart from the fact that it is offered by the developer, will plainly not be a material consideration and could be regarded only as an attempt to buy planning permission. If it has some connection with the proposed development which is not de minimis, then regard must be had to it. But the extent, if any, to which it should affect the decision is a matter entirely within the discretion of the decision-maker and in exercising that discretion he is entitled to have regard to his established policy.'
The Secretary of State had taken the view that, in accordance with his policy in Circular 16/91 on the acceptance of planning obligations, it was unreasonable to seek even a partial contribution in the circumstances of the case.
Lord Hoffman said:
'The law has always made a clear distinction between the question of whether something is a material consideration and the weight which it should be given. The former is a question of law and the latter is a question of planning judgment, which is entirely a matter for the planning authority. Provided that the planning authority has regard to all material considerations, it is at liberty (provided that it does not lapse into Wednesbury unreasonableness) to give them whatever weight the planning authority thinks or no weight at all.'