Gilbart J  EWHC 1173 (Admin) Bailii Town and Country Planning Act 1990, Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 Planning Updated: 16 January 2022; Ref: scu.564654
Appeal against refusal to grant listed status to a grade II listed spillway. Behrens HHJ  EWHC 3005 (Admin) Bailii Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 Planning Updated: 05 January 2022; Ref: scu.553782
Two important questions, one procedural and the other substantive, arising out of the decision of a planning inspector under the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990. It concerns the correct treatment of a pair of early 18th century lead urns, attributed to the Flemish sculptor John van Nost, each resting on a limestone … Continue reading Dill v Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government and Another: SC 20 May 2020
ICO The complainant requested information in connection with the decision by the Secretary of State not to list Slough Town Hall as a building of special architectural or historic interest in accordance with the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990. The Commissioner’s decision is that: the exception at regulation 12(4)(e) was engaged in … Continue reading Department for Culture Media and Sport (Decision Notice): ICO 4 Jan 2012
Section 66(1) of the 1990 Act requires a decision-maker to give ‘the desirability of preserving the building or its setting’ not merely careful consideration but considerable importance and weight when balancing the advantages of the proposed development against any harm from wind fram developnent.. Sullivan LJ  1 PandCR 22,  EWCA Civ 137 Bailii … Continue reading Barnwell Manor Wind Energy Ltd v East Northamptonshire District Council and Others: CA 18 Feb 2014
Challenge to grant of planning permission within a conservation area. Permission had been given for a single dwellig also with a southerly view over an area of outstanding natural beauty. The land belonged to the council. Held: The claim succeeded. The council, as planning authority, had erred in its approach to the general duty as … Continue reading Irving, Regina (on The Application of) v Mid-Sussex District Council and Another: Admn 28 Jun 2016
The removal of a listed building’s chimney stacks was an alteration allowing a claim for compensation. The phrases ‘alteration’ and ‘demolition’ are mutually exclusive. Although part of a building may be a listed building, a part of a listed building cannot itself be a listed building. Lord Browne-Wilkinson, Lord Griffiths, Lord Lloyd of Berwick, Lord … Continue reading Shimizu (UK) Ltd v Westminster City Council: HL 11 Feb 1997
When a local planning authority granted planning permission for a development of housing in two listed buildings and on land within their settings, did it misinterpret and misapply development plan policy for development proposed within a Green . .
The phrases ‘demolition’ and ‘alteration’ are mutually exclusive concepts when used for the purposes of the Planning Acts.
Held: When section 27(1)(a) referred to ‘an application for . . consent for the alteration . . of a listed building’, . .
The defendant appealed his conviction and sentence for infringements of the 1990 Act. The house was already very severly dilapidated when it came to be listed. He was accused of making changes outside the extent of the listed buildings consent he . .
The Council sought an order to quash the inspector’s decision to grant permission for a wind farm. . .
The owner sought to quash the designation of the property as a conservation area. . .
Challenge to designation of a former greyhound racing track as a conservation area. . .
The authority appealed by case stated from the dismissal of its complaints that the defendant had altered a listed building. He had been given permission to carry out certain works, but had in effect demolished and rebuilt the property.
Held: . .
The commissioners sought to charge to VAT charges for works which had been carried out to a building within the curtilage of a listed building. The taxpayer sought zero-rating.
Held: The outbuilding to which alterations were made must have . .
A previous owner of the land had carried out unauthorised alterations to the listed building, and the applicant sought retrospective permission for those and his own alterations. The authority did nor decide on that application, but instead issued . .
Taxpayers sought exemption from VAT for works to a building. The commissioners claimed that the main building was not a dwelling, and that therefore the outbuilding would not be exempt.
Held: The main building was listed, and the outbuilding . .
Land had first been excluded from the green belt, but then the plan had been revised. The revision was challenged, saying that a revision required exceptional circumstances making a revision necessary.
Held: there are not two tests, . .
The meaning of ‘curtilage’ whilst not strictly a term of art had caused considerable difficulties. There was nothing inherent in the concept to imply any limitation that the area should be small. In this case the curtilage of a manor house could . .
The offence provided in section 9 of contravening section 7 is an offence of strict liability. . .
‘Note (1)(a) of Group 6 provides that an essential feature of a protected building is that it is a listed building ‘within the meaning of’ the 1990 Act. A listed building ‘within the meaning of’ the 1990 Act is a building which falls within the . .
The curtilage of a building is a small area around it. An assessment of whether a separate structure was within the curtilage which did not consider the distance between the various buildings must be incorrect in that it had omitted an essential . .
A finding by the local planning authority that applications for listed buildings consent and planning permission were invalid, was not sufficient to exclude the right of the applicant to appeal to the Secretary of State against that finding of . .
The owner of a listed building obtained consent for certain works, but the local authority failed to notify the Secretary of State. Later the works were to be started, and the authority claimed that the consent was void, and sought an injunction. It . .
No judicial review was available against a planning decision where an appeal remained available under planning law. . .
1267 – 1278 – 1285 – 1297 – 1361 – 1449 – 1491 – 1533 – 1677 – 1688 – 1689 – 1700 – 1706 – 1710 – 1730 – 1737 – 1738 – 1751 – 1774 – 1792 – 1793 – 1804 – 1814 – 1819 – 1824 – 1828 – 1831 – 1832 … Continue reading Acts
The defendant appealed against the extent of fine and costs awards made against him following conviction for effective demolition of a substantial victorian property within a conservation area without consent. The court had refused to believe his . .