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.