No5 barristers appear in Hereford Rugby Club planning permission dispute
The Court of Appeal has dismissed an appeal by Hampton Bishop Parish Council against the decision of the High Court (Hickinbottom J;  EWHC 3947 [Admin]), which upheld the decision of Herefordshire Council to grant planning permission to Hereford Rugby Club to develop new rugby grounds in open countryside outside of the city.
The development includes 190 houses in order to subsidise the construction of the new rugby grounds. The decision also provided, by way of a section 106 agreement, that the club’s former grounds are to be transferred to the council for £1.
Richard Kimblin and Nina Pindham from No5 Chambers appeared on behalf of the respondent, Herefordshire Council.
No5 Chambers’ Ian Dove QC and Jack Smyth appeared on behalf of the Interested Parties, Hereford Rugby Club and Bloor Homes Ltd (which is carrying out the development).
Sign in or Register to continue reading this article
It's quick, easy and free!
It takes just 5 minutes to register. Answer a few simple questions and once completed you’ll have instant access.Register now
Why register to The Lawyer
In-depth, expert analysis into the stories behind the headlines from our leading team of journalists.
Identify the major players and business opportunities within a particular region through our series of free, special reports.
Receive your pick of The Lawyer's daily and weekly email newsletters, tailored by practice area, region and job function.
More relevant to you
To continue providing the best analysis, insight and news across the legal market we are collecting some information about who you are, what you do and where you work to improve The Lawyer and make it more relevant to you.
News from No5 Chambers
News from The Lawyer
Briefings from No5 Chambers
The question of whether two parties have entered in to a binding settlement compromising a case is often just as (if not more) acrimonious matter as the substantive case.
Gypsies and travellers have played a major role in human rights litigation both in the European Court of Human Rights and in UK courts