It is a long judgment that is worth reading and is relevant to English Law to some extent not least as to legal principles. The LA issued a notice in error saying permission had been granted. Then years later after building works had happened they issued a backdated notice purporting to supersede the original notice refusing permission. The court concluded that the second notice was invalid.
I have for some time been interested the basis upon which estoppel can be used to stop misbehaviour by public officials. Often people are promised outcomes for a particular action, but then the LA does a reverse ferret.
Still, an interesting judgment to read.
If you want me to respond to any comment please either comment only on the past few entries or put something in your comment to make it clear what you are commenting on (the URL would help). Otherwise I will not be able to find the comment quickly and will not respond.