In August 2015, a man submitted the planning permission request for a detached or semi-detached house on land in the municipality. The mayor rejected the request as he claimed a house on that stretch of land would be a security risk as students walk over the land every day.
In March 2017, a firm submitted a planning permission request to build a detached house on the same area, which the mayor rejected due to the request not confirming to the land development plans of 2002 and 2017. The man submitted an appeal request in May 2017, which the mayor again rejected in August 2017.
In October, he then took the case to the lower administrative court. The judges annulled the mayor's decision from September 2015. The reason for this is that it is the mayor's responsibility to examine whether planning permission requests conform with the land development plan, rather than safety principles. Consequently, he did not have the right to deny planning permission based on safety issues. However, the court backed the mayor in his following decisions as the land is not completely connected to open infrastructures.
As for court fees, the plaintiff must cover three quarters of the fees and the municipality must cover the remaining quarter.
