| Another Oyston Court Case on 18:50 - May 27 with 348 views | spell_chekker |
It must've cost him a pretty penny:
Ex-Blackpool FC owner Owen Oyston loses Supreme Court appeal to build 1,150 homes on Fylde coast
Owen Oyston, who formerly owned Blackpool FC, has had his large scale plans for more than 1,000 homes at Lytham Moss rejected by the Supreme Court
The former owner of Blackpool FC has lost a Supreme Court battle to build more than 1,000 homes on the Fylde coast.
Owen Oyston, through his company Fylde Coast Farms Ltd, had been given the green light to build 1,150 new homes at Lytham Moss, land on the edge of St Anne's when the company was known as Oyston Estates Ltd.
But despite Mr Oyston pushing for the site - east of the Queensway development - to be included in the local neighbourhood plan, it was rejected by Fylde Borough Council in 2017.
This was after a referendum in which 90% of the public voted in favour of the draft plan as it was presented; excluding Mr Oyston's housing scheme.
At the time, the council said the plan "meets the basic conditions and its promotion process is compliant with legal and procedural requirements".
The decision came despite an independent examiner of the draft plan saying Mr Oyston's housing project should be included given the council's then inability to demonstrate a five-year supply of new housing.
St Anne's on the Sea Town Council also rejected it as part of its St Anne's on the Sea Neighbourhood Development Plan.
Mr Oyston, who is listed as the only director of the firm on Companies House, appealed the decision to the High Court and Court of Appeal.
But on both occasions, the courts sided with Fylde Council, with case thrown out due to technical issues regarding Mr Oyston's application for a judicial review being made too late.
And now, the Supreme Court - the highest court in the country - has given the housing plan a firm no and also sided with the council's original decision.
The case was heard before Lord Lloyd Jones, Lord Briggs, Lady Arden, Lord Sales, and Lord Stephens on May 9.
Explaining the decision, Lord Briggs and Lord Sales stated it was not for "technical legal arguments" to undermine the legitimacy of a referendum outcome.
"Parliament would not wish to allow the outcome of a referendum to be set at nought by reason of technical legal arguments which could have been sorted out before the referendum was held," they noted.
"That would risk creating scepticism and disaffection with the new procedure which could undermine rather than promote public engagement.
"For those reasons, although differing to a limited extent from the reasoning of the courts below, we would dismiss this appeal."
Fylde Council and Owen Oyston were both contacted for comment. | |
|  |
| Another Oyston Court Case on 21:17 - May 27 with 329 views | spell_chekker |
It's to Lancs Live's detriment that they aren't serious about Blackpool and BFC.
They do a lot of football reporting and have reporters dedicated to Preston, Burnley, and Blackburn. | |
| |
| Another Oyston Court Case on 07:13 - May 28 with 319 views | BringBackTheRedRoom |
Anyone buying a house on Lytham Moss will need a canoe for 4 months of the year | |
| ‘Where there is harmony, may we bring discord. Where there is truth, may we bring error. Where there is faith, may we bring doubt. And where there is hope, may we bring despair’ |
| |
| Another Oyston Court Case on 07:53 - May 28 with 315 views | spell_chekker |
Perhaps it's recently been developed there, I wouldn't know, but it signals the death knell for the airport if you stick a load of houses on the site. | |
| |
| Another Oyston Court Case on 08:58 - May 30 with 295 views | spell_chekker |
Better late than never from the Lytham St.Anne's Express:
Defeat in highest court of the land for former Blackpool FC owner Owen Oyston
Owen Oyston has suffered another defeat in court, this time over his plans to build more than 500 houses in St Annes.
The former Blackpool FC owner, who lost a series of bitter court actions when he owned the club, had been told that his appeal over land at Lytham Moss has failed.
Fylde Coast Farms Ltd, formerly known as Osyton Estates, had appealed against Fylde Council’s decision not to include his site, east of Queensway, to be included in the local neighbourhood development plan as a housing site.
The council had decided in 2017 not to include the area in the plan, which will inform future planning applications, and a public referendum vote had been taken.
An independent examiner had looked through the proposals for the plan at the time and recommended that Oyston’s land be included, designated as housing, but the council disagreed, and was supported by Natural England, and the plan was eventually approved with that land designated countryside.
But Oyston Estates tried to get the decision overturned and launched a judicial review.
Fylde Coast Farms Ltd, had been granted permission to build 550 new homes at Lytham Moss, in December 2016, when the company was known as Oyston Estates Ltd and the latest ruling casts doubts over the future of this scheme.
The case was looked at by Lord Lloyd Jones, Lord Briggs, Lady Arden, Lord Sales, and Lord Stephens this month.
Barristers Jonathan Easton represented Fylde Council and Estelle Dehon, who represented Friends of the Earth in the Cuadrilla Fracking public enquiry at Blackpool FC in 2016, represented Fylde Coast Farms instructed by Instructed by Harrison Drury.
She suggested in the hearing that having time limits linked to each stage of a procedure in these plans would create an “unwelcome detailed dissection of a claim” and might also risk causing serious injustice to ordinary residents who might want to appeal as the six week period would restrict their ability to get legal help.
After the hearing, Lord Sales explained that the law governing planning permissions depends on development plans adopted by local planning authorities. He said that the Localism Act 2011 introduced a new procedure for the creation of neighbourhood development plans whose outcome would depend on a referendum to make them more democratic.
He said a series of steps were involved and a series of strict time limits to challenge the plan relating to each stage. He said this appeal was concerned with the interpretation of those time limits.
A map showing the contested area
He said a proposal for a neighbourhood development plan for St Annes was put forward which did not include the land in question owned by Oyston Estates at the time.
Despite an independent examiner recommending the site which Oyston wanted to develop for housing, should be included, the council decided against this.
The plan went to local referendum and was approved by a large majority and came into effect.
Oyston started judicial review proceedings after the end of the procedure, saying the council had acted unlawfully in refusing to accept the recommendation of the independent examiner and include his land as potential housing land.
But Lord Sales said his move was outside the six week time limit from when the council’s alleged legal error occurred and the appeal must be denied.
The High Court and the Court of Appeal had both agreed he was out of time at previous hearings and now the Supreme Court upheld that ruling. He said the law imposed strict time limits for challenges to each stage to avoid having a final referendum overturned when legal issues should have been sorted out before hand.
He said: “That would have risked creating disaffection with the new referendum procedure which could undermine rather than promote public engagement.”
The land is shown as an area of countryside in the Fylde Local Plan to 2032.
It is also shown as an area of countryside in the Saint Anne’s on The Sea Neighbourhood Development Plan (NDP) prepared by St Annes Town Council and made by Fylde Council on 24 May 2017.
The council disagreed with the independent examiner’s suggestion to included it as housing land at the time, because it felt he had made a mistake in how he applied Habitat Regulations in coming to his decision.
The council later commissioned Arcadis (the council’s ecological consultant) to carry out look at the issue, and following receipt of this document officers re-consulted Natural England who supported its case that this area should be designated countryside rather than housing land. In a previous appeal hearing at the High Court in 2017, the Oystons had to pay the council’s £1,250 legal costs for the failed legal challenge and Fylde Coast Farms may now be liable for yet more costs.
It also casts doubts about the firm’s plans to build houses there in future.
Coun Fiddler, chairman of the council’s planning committee said:“Fylde Council is extremely pleased that the Supreme Court has found in the council’s favour and confirmed the previous decisions of the High Court and the Court of Appeal.
“This decision protects the development strategy set out in the Fylde Local Plan to 2032 and we will be asking the developer of this site to withdraw their planning application.”
Blackpool Gazette: Thanks for reading. If you value what we do and are able to support us, a digital subscription is just £1 for your first month. Try us today by clicking here
https://www.lythamstannesexpress.co.uk/business/defeat-in-highest-court-of-the-l | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
