Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T01:27:40.498Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Law and localism: the case of multiple occupancy housing

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2018

Antonia Layard
Antonia Layard*
Affiliation:
Cardiff Law School
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper investigates how planning regulation constructs the local, encapsulating a locality and prioritising local decision making over regional and national scales. It draws on a case study of the regulation of multiple occupation to make three interrelated points. First, the analysis emphasises the plurality of ‘locals’ and the interrelationships between them. Secondly, the paper explains how the juridification of the local is required to make a locality legally visible. This operationalisation and construction of the local (legally, spatially and socially) must take place before the political logic of localism, the prioritisation of local decision making over other scales of governance, can take legal effect. Thirdly, the paper explains how, once the ‘local’ is legally constructed and can make decisions, this prioritisation of apparently neutral local expertise and knowledge can act to enclose the spatial and social with sometimes powerful exclusionary and regressive effects.

Type
Research Article
Information
Legal Studies , Volume 32 , Issue 4 , December 2012 , pp. 551 - 576
Copyright
Copyright © Society of Legal Scholars 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Speech by the Rt Hon Eric Pickles MP, 11 June 2010, available at http://www.communities.gov.uk/speeches/corporate/queensspeechforum.

2. Building the Big Society (2010) p 1, available at http://www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/media/407789/building-big-society.pdf.

3. The Localism Act 2011 builds on ‘a relentless flow’ of policy guidance on empowerment to translate community-developed policies or proposals into prescriptive land use plans; see generally Bishop, J ‘from parish plans to localism in England: straight track or long and winding road?’ (2010) 25 Planning Practice & Research 611 CrossRefGoogle Scholar at 611.

4. Above n 3, p 1.

5. Localism Act 2011 Pt 1 (cities are ‘permitted authorities’) and Pt 6, ch 3.

6. House of Commons Communities and Local Government Committee The Balance of Power Central and Local Government: Sixth Report of Session 2008–9 (London: House of Commons, 2009) p 3 Google Scholar.

7. The Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) (Amendment) (England) Order 2010, SI 2010/653.

8. Royston Vasey is a small fictional town in the north of England, and the setting of the BBC television comedy series ‘The League of Gentlemen’.

9. Above n 7, p 3.

10. Ibid, p 30.

11. The limits on local authority powers were controversially outlined in Brent London BC & Ors v Risk Management Partners Ltd [2011] UKSC7 (though see ch 2 of Pt 2 of the Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Act 2009). The new power of general competence (Localism Act, s 1(1) ‘A local authority has power to do anything that individuals generally may do’) will, it is hoped by many, now re-invigorate the abilities of local authorities to act as freely as possible. Though compare the ‘wellbeing power’ in s 2 of the Local Government Act 2000.

12. Press Conference held by Lord Judge, Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales, Royal Courts of Justice, London, 6 December 2011 p 14; Loughlin, M Local Government in the Modern State (London: Sweet & Maxwell, 1986) p 187 Google Scholar.

13. Rhodes, R Beyond Westminster and Whitehall: The Sub-Central Governments of Britain (London: Routledge, 1988)Google Scholar; Bevir, M and Rhodes, R The State as Cultural Practice (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Loughlin, above n 13, p 187.

14. Proposals to localise finance made by both the 1974 Layfield Committee and (mutedly) by the 2007 Lyons Inquiry were ignored. See also Carpenter, J ‘Addressing Europe's urban challenges: lessons from the Eu Urban Community Initiative’ (2006) 43 Urban Studies 2145 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

15. Jones, P and Evans, J Urban Regeneration in the UK: Theory and Practice (London: Sage, 2008)Google Scholar.

16. Corry, D and Stoker, G New Localism: Refashioning the Centre-Local Relationship (London: NLGN, 2002)Google Scholar.

17. House of Commons Communities and Local Government Committee Localism: Third Report of Session 2010–2012 (London: House of Commons, 2011) p 4 Google Scholar.

18. Bailey, N and Pill, M ‘the continuing popularity of the neighbourhood and neighbourhood governance in the transition from the “big state” to the “big society” paradigm’ (2011) 29 Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy 927 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

19. Layard, A ‘Shopping in the public realm: the law of place’ (2010) 37 JLS 412 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

20. Amin, A ‘Local community on trial’ (2005) 34 Economy and Society 612 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

21. Teubner, G ‘Juridification – Concepts, Aspects, Limits, Solutions’ in Teubner, G (ed) Juridification of Social Spheres (Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 1987)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; J Habermas The Theory of Communicative Action (Boston: Beacon Press, 1987).

22. Loughlin, above n 13, p 194; Loughlin, M ‘Law, ideologies, and the political-administrative system’ (1989) 16 J of Law and Society 21 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Cooper, D ‘Local government legal consciousness in the shadow of juridification’ (1995) 22 J of Law and Society 506 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

23. On juridification and framing, see Blichner, LC and Molander, A ‘Mapping juridification’ (2008) 14 ELJ 36 CrossRefGoogle Scholar at 47.

24. Rose, N ‘the death of the social’ (1996) 25 Economy and Society 327 CrossRefGoogle Scholar at 353.

25. The legal imprecision that this can give rise to is well illustrated in the litigation on town and village greens, R (on the application of Lewis) v Redcar and Cleveland Borough Council [2010] UKSC 11.

26. 7 Jun 2011: col 244, Localism Bill: Second Reading Tuesday 7 June 2011.

27. Localism Act 2011, s 116 and Sch 9, Pt 2.

28. Localism Act 2011, Sch 9, Pt 1.

29. Localism Act 2011, Sch 9, Pt 2.

30. National Association of Local Councils Annual Report 2009–2010 (London: NALC, 2010).

31. House of Commons Parliamentary Debates: Public Bill Committee Localism Bill Seventeenth Sitting, 1 March 2011, p 683.

32. Localism Act 2011, Sch 9, Pt 1.

33. House of Commons, above n 32, p 657.

34. Rt Hon Greg Clark MP ‘Better planning: from principle, to practice’ Speech given 18 November 2010, available at http://www.communities.gov.uk/speeches/corporate/betterplanning.

35. HM Government Local Growth: Realising Every Place's Potential (London: HM Government, 2010)Google Scholar p 34.

36. The most notable changes are to the community infrastructure levy and the abolition of the regional tier and the Infrastructure Planning Commission, as set out in ch 6 of the Localism Act 2011.

37. DCLG ‘Planning power from Town Hall and Whitehall to local people’ 6 December 2010, available at http://www.communities.gov.uk/news/planningandbuilding/1788710.

38. The literature here is vast; see Delaney, D and Leitner, H ‘the political construction of scale’ (1997) 16 Political Geography 93 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

39. House of Commons Parliamentary Debates: Public Bill Committee Localism Bill Sixteenth sitting, 17 February 2011, p 635.

40. For neighbourhood forums, rather than parish councils although even here democratic procedures are often ‘moribund’, House of Commons Parliamentary Debates: Public Bill Committee Localism Bill First Sitting, 25 January 2011, p 35 per Tony Burton, Director, Civic Voice.

41. Hansard HC Deb Second Reading of the Localism Bill col 527, 17 Jan 2011; Hansard House of Lords Second Reading of the Localism Bill col 148, 7 June 2011.

42. Bishop, above n 4.

43. DCLG Communities in Control, Real People, Real Power (London: The Stationery Office, 2009) p 1 Google Scholar.

44. Conservatives Open Source Planning: Green Paper (London: Conservatives, 2010) p 1 Google Scholar.

45. J Coles, Y Cooper MP and N Raynsford Making Sense of Localism (London: Smith Institute, 2004).

46. Schragger, R ‘the limits of localism’ (2002) 100 Mich L Rev 373 Google Scholar at 374.

47. Tiebout, C ‘a pure theory of local expenditures’ (1956) 64 J Pol Econ 416 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

48. Pateman, C Participation and Democratic Theory (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1970)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Mill, JS Considerations on Representative Democracy (New York: Harper & Bros, 1862)Google Scholar.

49. Briffault, R ‘Localism and regionalism’ (2000) 48 Buff LR 1 Google Scholar at 17.

50. Schragger, above n 47, at 374.

51. Amin, above n 21, at 618.

52. While restrictions could be included in privately concluded covenants, such as those at Poundbury in Dorset or in Bournville in Birmingham, these are exceptional in the UK although conditions on property maintenance can be included in licensing conditions; see Knox, M and Alcock, D Approaches to Community Governance: Models for Mixed Tenure Communities (Birmingham: Anthony Collins Solicitors, 2002) p 3 Google Scholar.

53. Pratchett, L ‘Local autonomy, local democracy and the “new localism” ’ (2004) 52 Political Studies 358 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

54. O'Riordan, T and Church, C ‘Synthesis and context’ in O'Riordan, T (ed) Globalism, Localism & Identity (London: Earthscan, 2001) p 12 Google Scholar.

55. Cairns, M ‘Houses in multiple occupation (Hmos)’ (2003) 7 L & T Review 9 Google Scholar.

56. DCLG Evidence Gathering – Housing in Multiple Occupation and Possible Planning Responses (London: DCLG, 2009)Google Scholar. For a historical perspective see Poovey, M Making a Social Body (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1995)Google Scholar.

57. Samuels, A ‘Planning control or lack of control over houses in multiple occupation’ (2011) 2 JPL 132 Google ScholarPubMed at 132.

58. The invention of the term is conventionally attributed to Smith, D Processes of Studentification in Leeds (Leeds: University of Leeds, 2002)Google Scholar.

59. Universities UK ‘Studentification’: a Guide to Opportunities, Challenges and Practice (London: Universities UK, 2006); Rugg, J and Rhodes, D The Private Rented Sector: Its Contribution and Potential (York: Centre for Housing Policy, 2008)Google Scholar.

60. Memorandum by Blackpool Council to House of Commons ODPM: Housing, Planning, Local Government and the Regions Committee Coastal Towns: Session 2005–06, Volume II: Written Evidence p 160.

61. A Hayman ‘DSS Welcome’ Regeneration & Renewal, 26 January 2009.

62. Hayman, above n 62.

63. DCLG, above n 57.

64. House of Commons Communities and Local Government Committee Community Cohesion and Migration, Tenth Report of Session 2007–08 (London: House of Commons, 2008) p 11 Google ScholarPubMed.

65. DCLG, above n 57, p 4.

66. Ibid, p 89.

67. Treasury, HM Spending Review 2010: Welfare Reform (London: HM Treasury, 2010)Google Scholar.

68. DCLG Evaluating the Impact of Houses in Multiple Occupation and Selective Licensing: The baseline before licensing in April 2006 (London: DCLG, 2007) p 24 Google Scholar.

69. DCLG, above n 57, p 14.

70. Ibid, p 7.

71. Ibid, p 2.

72. Family Housing, Flats and HMOs (Southampton: Southampton City Council, undated) p 1; Belfast City Council Houses in Multiple Occupation (HMOs) Subject Plan for Belfast City Council Area 2015 (Belfast, 2008) pp 26–27, available at http://www.planningni.gov.uk/index/=olicy/dev_plans/devplans_az/belfasthmo_2015/bmap2015-techsupp1-housing-vol=-3.pdf. For a fairly typical perspective from an MP concerned with studentification see S Williams Hansard, vol 461, col 33WH, 5 Jun 2007.

73. House of Commons, above n 65, pp 7 and 19; Government Response to the Communities and Local Government Committee Report on Coastal Towns (London: HMG, 2007) p 11.

74. ‘John Healey: local powers for councils to protect communities and improve standards in the private rented sector’DCLG Press Release 27 January 2010.

75. DCLG, above n 57, p 7.

76. HMO Lobby, available at http://hmolobby.org.uk/index.htm.

77. DCLG, above n 57.

78. Ibid.

79. Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 (the Use Classes Order), SI 1987/764,

80. Barnes v Sheffield CC (1995) 27 HLR 719 at 722–726; applied (2006) JPL 298, although the decision is reversed by legislation for housing law purposes, Housing Act 2004, ss77, 254 & 258; (2003) JPL 930.

81. Changes of Use of Buildings and Land, The Town & Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 ODPM Circular 03/2005, para 76.

82. Ibid, para 68.

83. APP/C/87/G31110/ 01 dated 10 February 1988; Law Society Gazette Planning Points 15 June 1988.

84. Simmons v Pizzey [1979] AC 37 at 59G, per Lord Hailsham.

85. Barnes v Sheffield, above n 81, at 723, per Sir Thomas Bingham.

86. Rogers v Islington LBC (2000) 32 HLR 138 at 141, per Nourse LJ.

87. Ibid, at 146, per Swinton Thomas LJ.

88. R (on the application of Hossack) v Kettering BC [2003] 2 P & CR 34, per Brown LJ.

89. This is particularly true of Thomas LJ in Rogers v Islington LBC, above n 87, and Brown LJ in Hossack v Kettering BC, above n 89, although Nourse LJ in Rogers v Islington LBC was more willing to provide a framework for decision making, recognising the difficulties environmental health officers were having on the ground.

90. Hansard House of Commons Standing Committee on Bills, Home Energy Conservation Bill, col 106, 26 February 2002.

91. Town and Country Planning Act 1990, s 55.

92. There are two further definitions within the definition of C3. These are (ii) not more than six residents living together as a single household where care is provided for residents and a catch-all class (iii) ‘not more than six residents living together as a single household where no care is provided to residents (other than a use within Class C4)’.

93. Communities and Local Government Circular 05/2010 Changes to Planning Regulations for Dwelling Houses in Multiple Occupation (London: DCLG, 2010)Google Scholar. This appears to be the accepted understanding even though there is no mention of the number three in the 2010 Regulations.

94. ‘Shapps: power for councils to manage shared homes in their area’DCLG Press Release 17 June 2010.

95. Town and Country planning (General Permitted Development), SI 1995/418, Art 4(1) as amended by The Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (Amendment) (England) Order 2010 (Amendment) (England) Order, SI 2010/654, Art 4(1).

96. Replacement Appendix D to Department of the Environment Circular 09/95: General Development Consolidation Order 1995.

97. Newcastle City Council, available at http://www.newcastle.gov.uk/core.nsf/a/housesinmultipleoccupation?opendocument.

98. Town and Country Planning Act 1990, s 70(2); Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, s 38(6).

99. Exeter City Council Supplementary Planning Guidance: Student Accommodation Development in Residential Areas (Exeter: Exeter City Council, 2008)Google Scholar para 5.

100. Newcastle City Council Supplementary Planning Document on Shared Housing (Newcastle: Newcastle City Council, 2008)Google Scholar para 8.5.

101. Belfast City Council Houses in Multiple Occupation (HMOs) Subject Plan for Belfast City Council Area 2015 (Belfast: Belfast City Council, 2008)Google Scholar p 30.

102. London Borough of Hillingdon Houses in Multiple Occupation Strategy 2005 to 2010 (Hillingdon: London Borough of Hillingdon, undated) p 10.

103. Dundee City Council Dundee Local Plan Review: Supplementary Planning Policy Guidance: Houses in Multiple Occupation (Dundee: Dundee City Council, 2006)Google Scholar p 8.

104. Glasgow City Plan, Policy Res 13, available at http://www.glasgow.gov.uk/en/Business/CityPlan/Part3_DevPol_DesGuide/Residential/RES10.htm.

105. Nottingham City Council Building Balanced Communities Supplementary Planning Document (Nottingham: Nottingham City Council, undated) p 21.

106. Their unit for assessment is the statistical Small Output Area Cluster with baseline percentages of student housing being drawn from council tax receipts, Charnwood Borough Council Student Housing Provision in Loughborough: Supplementary Planning Document (Charnwood: Charnwood BC, 2005) p 16.

107. Nottingham City Council Building Balanced Communities Supplementary Planning Document (Nottingham: Nottingham City Council, undated) p 21, available at http://www.nottinghamcity.gov.uk/index.aspx?articleid=714.

108. DCLG, above n 38.

109. ‘Localism Bill risks greater bureaucracy, town planners warn’Local Government Lawyer 17 January 2011.

110. McAuslan, P Ideologies of Planning Law (Oxford: Pergamon, 1980) p 2 Google Scholar.

111. House of Commons, above n 7, p 38.

112. Corry, D and Stoker, G New Localism: Refashioning the Centre-Local Relationship (London: New Local Government Network, 2002) p 22 Google Scholar.

113. Laski, H ‘The committee system in local government’ in Laski, HJ, Jennings, WI and Robertson, WA A Century of Municipal Progress (Woking: Unwin Bros, 1935) p 83 Google Scholar.

114. Valverde, M ‘Taking “land use” seriously: toward an ontology of municipal law’ (2005) 9 Law Text Culture 34 Google Scholar at 45.

115. Ibid.

116. DCLG, above n 57.

117. Jackson, J ‘Experience and expression: social and cultural significance in the fear of crime’ (2004) Brit J Criminol 946 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

118. Millie, A ‘Anti-social behaviour, behavioural expectations and an urban aesthetic’ (2008) 48 Brit J Criminol 379 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

119. Cowan, D and Carr, H ‘Actor-network theory, implementation, and the private landlord’ (2008) 35 JLS 149 CrossRefGoogle Scholar at 159.

120. Zaronaite, D and Tirzite, A The Dynamics of Migrant Labour in South Lincolnshire, South Holland District Council (Spalding: South Holland DC, 2006) p 73 Google Scholar.

121. Phillimore, J et al Migrants from A8 Countries and Housing in the East Midlands (Birmingham: University of Birmingham, 2008) p 5 Google Scholar.

122. Ibid.

123. These are regulated by the Gangmasters Licensing Authority, see Wynn, M ‘Regulating rogues? Employment agency enforcement and sections 15–18 of the Employment Act 2008’ (2009) Industrial Law Journal 64 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

124. DCLG, above n 69.

125. House of Commons Communities and Local Government Committee Report on the Supply of Rented Housing 2007–08 Eighth Report of Session (London: House of Commons, 2006)Google Scholar.

126. Rugg, J and Rhodes, D The Private Rented Sector: Its Contribution and Potential (York: Centre for Housing Policy, 2008) pp 112–113 Google Scholar.

127. DCLG The Private Rented Sector: Professionalism and Quality: The Government Response to the Rugg Review Consultation (London: DCLG, 2009) p 19 Google Scholar.

128. For example, see Arnstein, S ‘a ladder of citizen participation’ (1969) 35 JAIP 216 Google Scholar.

129. J Healey ‘Local powers for councils to protect communities and improve standards in the private rented sector’DCLG Press Release 27 January 2010.

130. DCLG, above n 57, p 7.

131. Sager, L ‘Tight little islands: exclusionary zoning, equal protection, and the indigent’ (1968) 21 Stan L Rev 767 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

132. Meyers, M ‘(Un)equal protection for the poor: exclusionary zoning and the need for stricter scrutiny’ (2004) 6 U Pa J Const L 349 Google Scholar at 354.

133. In the US this was also graphically illustrated by the cases on school segregation, notably San Antonio Independent School District v Rodriguez 411 US 1 (1973) and Milliken v Bradley 418 US 717 (1974).

134. Cashin, S ‘Localism, self-interest, and the tyranny of the favored quarter: addressing the barriers to new regionalism’ (2009) 88 Geo LJ 1985 Google Scholar.

135. Alexander, G ‘Dilemmas of group autonomy’ (1989) 75 Cornell L Rev 1 Google Scholar.

136. Frug, G ‘the city as a legal concept’ (1980) 93 Harv L Rev 1057 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

137. Been, V ‘Comment on Professor Jerry Frug's “the geography of community” ’ (1995) 48 Stan L Rev 1109 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

138. Buchanan v Warley 245 US 60.

139. See for example, Corrigan v Buckley 271 US 323 (1926); Shelley v Kraemer 334 US 1 (1948); Barrows v Jackson 346 US 249 (1953) and Delaney, D Race, Place and the Law 1836–1948 (Austin: University of Texas Press, 1998)Google Scholar.

140. R Briffault ‘Our localism: part I’ (1990) 90 Col L R and Ford, RT ‘the boundaries of race: political geography in legal analysis’ (1994) 107 Harv L Rev 1843 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

141. Amin, above n 21.

142. Barron, D ‘a localist critique of new federalism’ (2002) 51 Duke L J 434 Google Scholar.

143. Gabriel, J Whitewash: Racialised Politics and the Media (London: Routledge, 1998)Google Scholar.

144. DCLG, above n 57, p 13; DCLG ‘Houses in Multiple Occupation Consultation Responses’ (London: DCLG, 2010) A73Google Scholar.

145. Boston Borough Council, available at http://www.boston.gov.uk/index.php?option=com_docman&task.

146. Hubbard, P ‘Accommodating otherness: anti-asylum centre protest and the maintenance of white privilege’ (2005) 30 Trans Inst Br Geogr 52 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

147. Quoted in A Chrisafis ‘Two square miles of housing hell’Guardian 24 October 2000.

148. HMO Lobby group, available at http://hmolobby.org.uk/natlocalplans.htm and http://hmolobby.org.uk/natcounciltax.htm.

149. Hubbard, P ‘Regulating the social impacts of studentification: a Loughborough case study’ (2008) 40 Environment and Planning A 323 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

150. Wilton, R ‘Colouring special needs: locating whiteness in Nimby conflicts’ (2002) 3 Social & Cultural Geography 303 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Wilton, R ‘the constitution of difference: space and psyche in landscapes of exclusion’ (1998) 29 Geoforum 173 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

151. DCLG, above n 57, p 11.

152. Equality Act 2010.

153. ODPM Planning and Diversity: Research into Policies and Procedures (London: ODPM, 2004) p 32 Google Scholar; ODPM Participatory Planning for Sustainable Communities: Communication media technologies International Experience of Mediation, Negotiation and Engagement in Making Plans (London: ODPM, 2003)Google Scholar para 1.1.

154. Booth, C ‘Managing diversity and mainstreaming equality: reflections on initiatives in the planning inspectorate’ (2006) 7 Planning Theory & Practice 47 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

155. For an application of these provisions in the planning context see R (On the Application of Baker) v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government [2008] 2 P & CR 6.

156. Khaliq, U ‘the accommodation and regulation of Islam and Muslim practices in English law’ (2002) 6 Ecclesiastical Law Journal 332 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Cooper, D ‘Promoting injury or freedom: radical pluralism and orthodox Jewish symbolism’ (2000) 23 Ethnic and Racial Studies 1062 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed; Watson, S ‘Symbolic spaces of difference: contesting the eruv in Barnet, London and Tenafly, New Jersey’ (2005) 23 Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 597 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

157. ODPM Planning and Diversity: Research into Policies and Procedures (London: ODPM, 2004)Google Scholar.

158. Brighton & Hove City Council Local Development Framework Core Strategy Proposed Submission (Brighton: Brighton & Hove City Council, 2010) p 135 Google Scholar.

159. City of Westminster Action Plan Chinatown: Working for the Future of Chinatown (London: City of Westminster, 2009)Google Scholar.

160. ODPM Diversity and Equality in Planning: A Good Practice Guide (London: ODPM, 2005) p 15 Google Scholar. Although it is striking that the only commitment in the current draft of the National Planning Policy Framework is biodiversity, DCLG, above n 41.

161. See Brentwood BC v Ball [2009] EWHC 2433; R (on the application of Rafferty) v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government [2009] EWCA Civ 809; Basildon DC v McCarthy [2008] EWCA Civ 1586; R (on the application of Holland) v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government [2009] EWHC 2161; South Cambridgeshire DC v Gammell [2008] EWCA Civ 1159. In the ECHR see Buckley v United Kingdom (1997) 23 EHRR 101; Chapman v United Kingdom (2001) 33 EHRR 18; Connors v United Kingdom (2005) 40 EHRR 9.

162. South Buckinghamshire DC v Porter (No 2) [2004] UKHL 33. See also Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council v First Secretary of State [2003] EWHC 995.

163. Sandland, R ‘Developing a jurisprudence of difference: the protection of the human rights of travelling peoples by the European Court of Human Rights’ (2008) 8 HRLR 475 Google Scholar.

164. ODPM Circular 01/2006 Planning for Gypsy and Traveller Caravan Sites (although these policies are currently under review, see Planning for Traveller Sites 13 April 2011, which is designed to replace ODPM Circular 01/2006).

165. Under previous Labour Governments, this may now be changing under the draft National Planning Policy Framework, DCLG, above n 41.

166. Young, IM Justice and the Politics of Difference (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1999)Google Scholar.

167. Butler, T ‘for gentrification?’ (2007) 39 Env and Planning A 162 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

168. Sandercock, L ‘When strangers become neighbours: managing cities of difference’ (2000) 1 Planning Theory & Practice 13 CrossRefGoogle Scholar at 23. There is an extensive planning literature here, see also Donald, J ‘This, here, now. Imagining the modern city’ in Westwood, S and Williams, J (eds) Imagining Cities (London: Routledge, 1997)Google Scholar; Fainstein, S The Just City (Cornell: Cornell University Press, 2010)Google Scholar; Fincher, R and Jacobs, J (eds) Cities of Difference (London: Guilford Press, 1998)Google Scholar; Krishnarayan, V and Thomas, H Ethnic Minorities and the Planning System (London: RTPI, 1993)Google Scholar; Sandercock, L Towards Cosmopolis: Planning for Multicultural Cities (Chichester: John Wiley and Sons, 1997)Google Scholar.

169. T Lloyd ‘Localism must not become “nimby's charter” ’Inside Housing 26 May 2010.

170. Valverde, M ‘Seeing like a city: the dialectic of modern and premodern ways of seeing in urban governance’ (2011) 45 Law & Society Review 277 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Sassen, S Territory, Authority, Rights (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

171. Loughlin, above n 23.

172. Norberg-Schulz, C Genius Loci: Towards a Phenomenology of Architecture (London: Academy Editions, 1980)Google Scholar.

173. Harvey, D Justice, Nature & the Geography of Difference (Oxford: Blackwell, 1986)Google Scholar; May, J ‘Globalization and the politics of place: place and identity in an inner London neighbourhood’ (1996) 21 Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers 194 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Sibley, D Geographies of Exclusion: Society and Difference in the West (London: Routledge, 1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

174. Cresswell, T In Place/Out of Place: Geography, Ideology, and Transgression (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1996)Google Scholar.