THE inquiry into Donald Trump's proposal for a golf resort near Balmedie, Aberdeenshire is likely to be the last "hurrah" of the old planning system. The main challenge of the new system is likely to be by way of judicial review.
For such applications, a time limit of three months was introduced in England but not in Scotland. However, in what has been justified as a drive for "good administration" the Scottish courts appear to have taken steps to plug that gap.
They have
done so by using the common law concept of "mora, taciturnity and acquiescence" – meaning that there has been undue delay. Such a plea is necessarily protean but one example of its application can be seen by a recent decision of Lord Eassie.
Moray Council tendered a plea of mora, taciturnity and acquiescence after a petition was raised for judicial review six months after outline planning consent was granted, despite objectors' correspondence and petition during that period.
Lord Eassie appears to have been influenced in this case by the fact that planning consents take immediate effect and decided that there was a need for objectors to act with alacrity in planning matters. He was critical of the lapse of six weeks between the decision and the first letter being sent to the local councillor and viewed the period between that letter being sent on 25 January and the council's reply on 3 April as one of inactivity.
He also criticised the fact that no immediate steps were taken by the objectors upon receipt of that reply, and concluded that the delay was unreasonable in the circumstances.
He held that such a delay allowed Moray Council to infer that those objecting to the planning permission had by then acquiesced in the validity of the decision. The petition was dismissed.
The above decision suggests that if you have got something you want to say in planning matters then you ought to say it quickly or be prepared to forever hold your peace!
• Richard Anderson, advocate
The full article contains 350 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
