Ecolex Logo
The gateway to
environmental law
Search results » Jurisprudence

Thomas George Clarke – v – The Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions and Tunbridge Wells Borough Council

Country/Territory
United Kingdom
Type of court
Others
Date
Oct 9, 2001
Source
UNEP, InforMEA
Court name
High Court of Justice
Seat of court
London
Judge
Burton
Reference number
CO/1844/2001
Language
English
Subject
Land & soil
Keyword
Human rights
Abstract
The Appellant, a Romany Gypsy, appealed under section 288 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 against the decision taken by a Planning Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions. The Appellant owned the land he lived on. The Planning Inspector had dismissed the Appellant’s appeal against a decision by the Tunbridge Wells Borough Council to refuse him planning permission to use such land as a site on which to station a caravan for residential use by himself and his family as Gypsies. There was a circular issued by the Department of Environment number 1/94, which provided that as a rule it would not be appropriate to make provision for gypsy sites in areas of open land where development was severely restricted, for example, Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty, Sites of Special Scientific Interest, and other protected areas. The land in question lied in the High Weald Special Landscape Area. The Special Landscape Areas were of considerable importance to the public, so far as the protection of the environment was concerned. The primary argument of the appellant was that the Inspector acted in breach of Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, dealing with the right to respect for private and family life. The Planning Inspector took the view that the front boundary fence and the top of the mobile home above it were open to view, which had a markedly adverse effect on the character and appearance of the Special Landscape Area. The Council had offered permanent accommodation as an alternative, but the appellant had never lived in a conventional house and found the prospect distressing. The court was of the view in certain appropriate circumstances it could amount to a breach of Articles 8 to weigh in the balance and hold against a Gypsy applying for planning permission that he or she had refused conventional housing accommodation as being contrary to his or her culture. Furthermore, it was not clear what the Inspector’s conclusion was in relation to the issue of conventional housing and which other circumstances the Inspector had taken into account when he had reached his decision. The Court concluded that the decision had to be quashed and the matter be returned for a formal hearing. The decision would need to be made afresh taking into account all legally relevant considerations.
Full text
Clarke_v_SSETR.htm