3 thoughts on “Newton Poppleford: appeal to develop Badger Close – dismissed with EDDC’s appeal for costs refused”

1. The appeal was dismissed, so the houses will not be built. Good.

   The EDDC claim for costs was refused. Bad.

   Paragraph 34 of the decision document (http://www.pcs.planningportal.gov.uk/pcsportal/fscdav/READONLY?OBJ=COO.2036.300.12.6654392&NAME=/INSPECTOR%27S%20DECISION.pdf). Damning.

   LikeLike

   • Unfortunately, costs were refused because the judge believed the applicant’s solicitor who said he sent a crucial letter (or email) to EDDC who denied receipt of it. And, on the basis of this, it is possible that the development on King Alfred Way may also have been refused but EDDC refused to wait for the outcome of this case, preferring to give planning permission to Clinton Devon Estates before the judgment.

     LikeLike

     • If the solicitor produced evidence, the inspector is bound to believe him. It seems to me that EDDC claimed costs on the wrong basis – they should have claimed costs on the basis that the AONB grounds for refusal were reasonable and that the appeal was therefore frivolous.

       LikeLike

Comments are closed.