Council launches judicial review of ultra vires grant of planning permission

William Rose and Clarice Harper-Smith report on why a Leader of a council is seeking judicial review of an ultra vires decision to grant planning permission for the change of use of 400-year-old Blue Ball Inn from public house into holiday rental.

Sharpe Pritchard have recently been instructed on a matter, Frederica Smith-Roberts v Somerset West & Taunton Council (and Fowler), seeking judicial review of an ultra vires decision made by Somerset West and Taunton Council (SWT) to grant planning permission.

The planning application proposed a change of use of the Blue Ball Inn, Cockercombe Road, Bagborough, from a public house to a holiday rental. The Council received 14 letters of objection to the application from local residents, and objections from West Bagborough Parish Council and the AONB.

Under SWT Council’s Constitution, due to the volume of objections, the application should have been referred to and determined by the Council’s Planning Committee. However, due to an administrative error, the Council did not follow the usual constitutional procedure of taking such a protested planning application to a meeting of the Council’s Planning Committee for determination. Instead, the Council granted planning permission for the development under delegated officer powers, without the legal authority to take the decision.

Planning permission was granted by SWT on the 19 December 2023 for change of use of Blue Ball Public House (Sui generis) to Holiday Accommodation with Ancillary Bar (C3) and Community Use (F1 & F2).

Consequently, the Council wishes to ask the High Court to grant the Council permission to apply for judicial review, to make an order quashing the planning permission granted and have the application redetermined using the Council’s proper procedures.

Sharpe Pritchard are acting for the Claimant in this matter, Frederica Smith-Roberts, the Leader of SWT Council, who is seeking to apply for judicial review of SWT Council’s decision. The Claimant is seeking to challenge the decision on the grounds that the permission was granted without authority to do so, making the decision ultra vires and should therefore be quashed.

The Council has produced and signed a consent order where it has accepted that the decision to grant the planning permission was unlawful under the Council’s constitution.

At the time of writing, the interested party, Mr Fowler, the applicant for the permission and who secured planning consent, has not signed the consent order but has been invited to do so.

The matter is not yet resolved.

William Rose is a Partner, Privy Council Agent and Clarice Harper-Smith is a Trainee Solicitor at Sharpe Pritchard LLP.

For further insight and resources on local government legal issues from Sharpe Pritchard, please visit the SharpeEdge page by clicking on the banner below.

This article is for general awareness only and does not constitute legal or professional advice. The law may have changed since this page was first published. If you would like further advice and assistance in relation to any issue raised in this article, please contact us by telephone or email This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.