0
The High Court (Ouseley J.) today dismissed a claim seeking to quash the Urban Regeneration Agency (Edge Lane West, Liverpool) Compulsory Purchase Order (No.2) 2007 ("the CPO") (CO/11226/2008 Pascoe v (i) Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government; and (ii) the Homes and Communities Agency). The CPO was made under s. 162(1) of the Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993 and the Acquisition of Land Act 1981 by what was then English Partnerships (under powers granted to the Urban Regeneration Agency) on 3 July 2007. The Order seeks to secure the regeneration of and improvements to the Edge Lane corridor and the development and redevelopment of land within the Kensington/Edge Hill area of Liverpool. The CPO seeks to give effect to the Government's HMRI Pathfinder policy. The CPO was made following the quashing of an earlier almost identical order by Forbes J.: see Pascoe v First Secretary of State [2006] EWHC 2356 (Admin); [2007] 1 W.L.R. 885. The Claimant argued that (i) the Secretary of State had failed to give adequate reasons in respect of a letter from CABE sent to Liverpool City Council made in respect of a reserved matters application concerning part of the Edge Lane area and which had been forwarded to the Secretary of State by an objector as a post-inquiry representation; and (ii) that the Inspector and Secretary of State had erred in concluding that the alternative BEVEL Plan B proposed by objectors was not achievable. The learned Judge rejected both grounds. James Maurici appeared for the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government Neil Cameron appeared for the Homes and Communities Agency.
