Secretary of State for Transport (Appellant) v Curzon Park Ltd and others (Respondents)
Case ID: 2021/0120
Case summary
Issue
Did the Court of Appeal err in finding that when determining the development for which planning permission could reasonably have been expected to be granted in relation land, the decision maker is not entitled to take into account applications or decisions relating to other land arising from the compulsory acquisition of land for the same underlying scheme.
Facts
In 2018, the Secretary of State for Transport compulsorily acquired four contiguous sites for the construction of a new rail station in Birmingham. Each of the landowners applied to Birmingham City Council for a certificate of appropriate alternative development. The Council considered each of the applications in isolation. Appeals were lodged in respect of all four applications. The Upper Tribunal directed that it would determine a preliminary issue in all four appeals at a single hearing. Following judgment from the Upper Tribunal, the Secretary of State appealed to the Court of Appeal. The Secretary of State now seeks permission to appeal to the Supreme Court.
Judgment appealed
Parties
Appellant
Secretary of State for Transport
Respondent(s)
Curzon Park Ltd
Quintain City Park Gate Birmingham Ltd
(1) Eastside Partnership Nominee Company Ltd, (2) PMB General Partner Ltd
Birmingham City University
Birgmingham City Council
Appeal
Justices
Lord Kitchin, Lord Sales, Lord Hamblen, Lord Leggatt, Lady Rose
Hearing start date
19 April 2023
Hearing finish date
20 April 2023
| Watch hearing | ||
|---|---|---|
| 19 April 2023 | Morning session | Afternoon session |
| 20 April 2023 | Morning session | |
Judgment details
Judgment date
10 August 2023
Neutral citation
[2023] UKSC 30
- Judgment (PDF)
- Press summary (HTML version)
- Judgment on The National Archives (HTML version)
- Judgment on BAILII (HTML version)
A formal hand-down took place on 8 November 2023.
| Watch Judgment summary | |
|---|---|
| 8 November 2023 | Judgment summary |