The judge said that the council’s consultation process was lawful, though said some elements “could undoubtedly have been improved upon”.
However, he said that the way the council considered input from engagement with the public was unlawful.
Maybe a summery would have been inorder since the title is quite an exaggeration.
WDAG had delivered a “detailed” 53-page presentation outlining its concerns about the scheme to a councillor, but Judge Smith said it was not clear whether it was then shared with officers making decisions over the scheme.
He said: “On the evidence, I am forced to conclude that, despite assurances to the contrary given to the claimant, the 53-page presentation did not form part of the council’s considerations in its decision to make the orders.
“It should have done. Its content was highly relevant to the issues being deliberated upon and thus it was a material consideration.
“The failure to have regard to it was a serious failing, rendering the decision to make the orders unlawful.”
Maybe a summery would have been inorder since the title is quite an exaggeration.