The respondent's application for summary dismissal succeeded: the Tribunal dismissed the entire application for review under section 94A(2)(b) of the PE Act, finding it lacked objective merit and had no real prospect of success, and vacated the compulsory conference and hearing. The Tribunal also held that the estate of a deceased person and individual beneficiaries who had not independently objected lacked standing under sections 57 and 82 of the PE Act. Where a proposed development objectively complies with Standard A15 (clause 54.04-6), the overlooking objective is deemed met and the Tribunal has no discretion to impose additional screening or design modifications; any remaining overlooking is deemed reasonable and lawful, meaning section 13(a) of the Charter is not engaged because the interference is neither unlawful nor arbitrary. The UK Supreme Court decision in Fearn & Ors v Board of Trustees of the Tate Gallery, concerning private nuisance from visual intrusion, was held to have no application to the statutory review jurisdiction under the PE Act.
The full text is available to signed-in members.