Where a planning and environment appeal is determined on multiple independent grounds, an appellant alleging error of law must identify such error on each ground that independently supports the decision. The adequacy of reasons for preferring one expert over another in a planning context is assessed by reference to the principles in Soulemezis and Cypressvale, and the choice between conflicting experts may be a matter of judgment rather than detailed reasoning.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 7 later cases that cite this judgment.