UTLC COMPENSATION – preliminary issues – Town and Country Planning Act 1990 ss. 97 and 107 – basis for calculation of compensation – 1951 planning permission for mining on Portland – permission becoming subject to procedure for the review of old mineral planning permissions (ROMP) under Environment Act 1995 Sched. 13 – designation of part … Continue reading Portland Stone Firms Ltd and Another v Dorset County Council: UTLC 4 Dec 2014
The Council had granted planning permission for four student housing units. The Executive complained that they were too near to a liquified gas storage depot. The Court was now asked whether the impact of any compensation which might be payable on any revocation of the consent was a proper material consideration for the Council in … Continue reading The Health and Safety Executive v Wolverhampton City Council: SC 18 Jul 2012
Local Authority may challenge own grant of permission by application for judicial review where application tainted to avoid compensation. . .
An existing outline planning permission to develop land to include a parade of 12 shops in central London. In 1968 Pan American Airways Corporation took a sub-lease of the land and got planning permission to develop it as an air terminal for a period of 14 years, terminating (with an extension) on 31 March 1984. … Continue reading Regent Lion Properties Limited v Westminster City Council: CA 1990
The defendant company was accused of felling a tree in breach of a tree preservation order. Recorder Zucker QC had ruled held that the prosecution did not have to prove that the tree in question was not dying, or dead or dangerous or creating a nuisance. It was for the defendant to establish one or … Continue reading Regina v Alath Construction Ltd: CACD 1990
Judges: Forbes J Citations: Gazette 14-Mar-2002 Statutes: Town and Country Planning Act 1990 320 (2), Local Government Act 1972 259(5) Jurisdiction: England and Wales Planning, Costs Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.167981
Permission had been given for residential development of land provided that access was provided. The access specified was to be over land owned by the council. It was known that the Council would not allow such access. The land owner sought an order that the permission should stand but without the condition. The Secretary had … Continue reading British Railways Board v Secretary of State for the Environment and Another: HL 29 Oct 1993
Land had been owned by the authority and used as a children’s home. After a boundary change taking the land outside its area, it sought to sell the land for development. The neighbours, claiming the benefit of a restrictive covenant allowing only one house on the land, objected. Using the 1972 Act, the authority purported … Continue reading London Borough of Sutton v Bolton and Another: ChD 3 Feb 1993
Issues arose as to a new planning permission for two existing hangars. Held: The appeal succeeded. The question of the validity of conditions attached to planning permissions will sometimes be a difficult one. To be valid, a condition must be imposed for a planning purpose and not for an ulterior one; it must fairly and … Continue reading Newbury District Council v Secretary of State for the Environment: HL 1980
The applicants appealed an enforcement notice, with regard to a change of use, to use land for a multiplicity of businesses. The inspector had suggested he would correct by amendment an error in the notice. The section provided that an amendment could be made unless it caused injustice. The applicant argued that an amendment could … Continue reading Simms v Secretary of State for Environment, Broxtowe Borough Council: Admn 18 Mar 1997
Where an enforcement notice did not include any required steps, s173(11) does not apply, and an inspector has no power under s176(1) to amend the notice by adding steps to be taken where the issuing local authority could not itself have included it. Citations: Times 16-Jun-1999, Gazette 16-Jun-1999,  3 All ER 247 Statutes: Town … Continue reading Tandridge District Council v Verrechia: CA 16 Jun 1999
An Act might include a power to amend another by secondary legislation, but any such power must be construed narrowly. The owners of property sought to change its use from long term residential use to a use for short term visitors. S25 of the main Act remained unaffected by subsequent secondary legislation. Citations: Times 14-Mar-2000 … Continue reading Hyde Park Residence Ltd v Secretary of State for et Environment Transport and the Regions and Another: CA 14 Mar 2000
Three companies had applied for permission to build retail food superstores in Witney. The Inspector had recommended Tesco’s proposal, but the respondent rejected it. Tesco’s had offered to provide by way of a section 106 agreement full funding for a link road as part of its application. Held: The offer of funding for the link … Continue reading Tesco Stores Ltd v Secretary of State for the Environment and Others: HL 11 May 1995
The appellant’s land was to be taken under compulsory purchase by the Council who wished to use it to assist Tesco in the construction of a new supermarket. Tesco promised to help fund restoration of a local listed building. Sainsbury objected an now appealed against the Court of Appeal’s overturning of the orer in its … Continue reading Sainsbury’s Supermarkets Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v Wolverhampton City Council and Another: SC 12 May 2010
W challenged the grant of planning permission for the change of use of agricultural land to allow erection of a wind turbine, saying that the authority had taken into account a promise by the land owner to run the scheme as a community development contributing funds locally, and that such was not capable of being … Continue reading Wright, Regina (on The Application of Wright) v Resilient Energy Severndale Ltd and Another: SC 20 Nov 2019
The House was asked whether the 1971 Act permitted the relevant authorities, by resort to their development plans, to support the retention of traditional industries or was the ambit of the Act such as to permit only ‘land use’ aims to be pursued? The court considered also the relevance of personal considerations in planning matters. … Continue reading Westminster City Council v Great Portland Estates plc: HL 31 Oct 1984
The CEGB wanted to undertake a survey using its statutory powers to check whether land might be suitable for a nuclear power station, and wanted the police to prevent demonstrators from preventing the survey. It now requested an order of mandamus to oblige the chief constable to provide the level of support requested. Held: The … Continue reading Regina v Chief Constable of Devon and Cornwall, Ex parte Central Electricity Generating Board: CA 1982
The parties disputed what constituted an application under section 288 of the 1990 Act. Held: Though the time limit for filing an application was absolute, a discretion remained with the court to allow subsequent service out of time in the court rules. The Inspector’s letter was not sufficiently clear as to whether permission was being … Continue reading Mendip District Council v Secretary of State for the Environment and Castle Housing Society Limited: 1993
Nicholls LJ discussed the nature and enforcement of agreements under section 106 of the 1990 Act, saying: ‘A section 106 agreement may be enforced against the original covenantor in contract, and against successors in title to the original convenantor by virtue of sub.(2). Enforcement is a matter solely for the local planning authority, and there … Continue reading Attorney-General ex rel. Scotland v Barratt Manchester Ltd: CA 2 Jan 1990
(Commission) A local authority had served an enforcement notice on ISKCON alleging a material change of use of the land. ISKCON appealed against the notice under section 174(2) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and after a report by an inspector the Secretary of State largely confirmed the enforcement notice. The High Court … Continue reading ISKCON v United Kingdom: ECHR 8 Mar 1994
Planning battles had raged over the use of the former GLC County Hall. The question was whether it was desirable and appropriate to retain use of part of the building for London Government offices and centred on the ‘competing needs’ test. Held: County Hall in London was not an office use, but was a Local … Continue reading London Residuary Body v Lambeth London Borough Council: HL 1990
The applicant sought to allow the roof of its store to be used as a helicopter landing pad, and sought a lawful use certificate. It asserted that such a use was incidental to its main normal use. The secretary of state refused a certificate, against the inspector’s advice, saying that such a use was not … Continue reading Harrods Ltd v Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions and Another: CA 7 Mar 2002
The council had obtained interim and final injunctions in 2017 against anticipated trespassers on its land and the order was due to expire. It now ought its extension and to amend the terms of the order. Held: The court noted that no person had yet been served with any documents, and that the legal landscape … Continue reading London Borough of Enfield v Persons Unknown and Others: QBD 2 Oct 2020
The applicants were gypsies. They located a mobile home on land within the green belt, but did not obtain planning permission. They attacked the decision report saying it had failed to follow the guidance as to the need for sites for gypsies, and had failed to take account of the personal circumstances of the applicants. … Continue reading Nichols v The Secretary Of State For The Environment, Basildon District Council: Admn 21 Mar 1997
The grant of a temporary planning permission for a use that has previously been the subject of an enforcement notice has the effect of discharging the enforcement notice for all time, in so far as it relates to that use, rather than merely for the period for which the temporary planning permission is in force. … Continue reading Cresswell and Cresswell v Pearson: Admn 20 Mar 1997
The power to incorporate highway works in planning agreements is limited to subject land. Forbes J said: ‘It is common ground that the new Section 278 was intended to fit into and play its part in the overall legislative system for the controlled development of land through the planning process and I accept that Section … Continue reading Regina v Warwickshire County Council Ex Parte Powergen Plc: QBD 9 Jan 1997
A defendant facing a charge of not complying with an enforcement notice may not challenge the validity of the notice upon which the enforcement proceedings are based by asserting it to be unreasonable. Citations: Gazette 07-Jun-1995, Independent 11-May-1995, Times 19-Apr-1995 Statutes: Town and Country Planning Act 1990 179 (1) Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: Appealed … Continue reading Regina v Wicks: CACD 19 Apr 1995
The council appealed against a finding that it had not validly served a notice on the respondent under section 215 of the 1990 Act. Judges: Arden, Lewison LJJ Citations:  EWCA Civ 50,  WLR(D) 91 Links: Bailii, WLRD Statutes: Town and Country Planning Act 1990 215 329, Local Government Act 1972 233 Jurisdiction: England … Continue reading Oldham Metropolitan Borough Council v Tanna: CA 10 Feb 2017
UTLC COMPENSATION – modification order – preliminary issue – leaseholder claimant – freeholder granting lease to another person on expiry of claimant’s lease – whether compensation could be claimed on basis that in the absence of the modification a new lease would have been granted to the claimant – held that it could not – … Continue reading Bond and Others v Dorset County Council: UTLC 11 Oct 2010
An area with a hard surface which was used as a hard standing for feeding sheep, and which was formed by deposit of builder’s rubble was not a habitation and therefore was not used for the accommodation of sheep. Since the landowner was entitled to create such a surface, and entitled to use such waste … Continue reading Taylor v Secretary of State for the Environment Transport and the Regions and Another: QBD 30 Jan 2001
Power to call in is administrative in nature The powers of the Secretary of State to call in a planning application for his decision, and certain other planning powers, were essentially an administrative power, and not a judicial one, and therefore it was not a breach of the applicants’ rights to a fair hearing before … Continue reading Regina (Holding and Barnes plc) v Secretary of State for Environment Transport and the Regions; Regina (Alconbury Developments Ltd and Others) v Same and Others: HL 9 May 2001
A ‘shop window’ for planning purposes means a window in a shop through which the shop or the wares of the shop can be seen. Times 02-Jan-1998,  EWHC Admin 1015 Town and Country Planning Act 1990 224(3) England and Wales Planning Updated: 03 January 2022; Ref: scu.137960
The Council sought orders to restrain the defendants from using certain land for the display of advertisements. Moriarty QC  EWHC Admin 800 Town and Country Planning Act 1990 187B, Local Government Act 1972 222, Town and Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) Regulations 1992 England and Wales Planning Updated: 03 January 2022; Ref: scu.137745
The appellants appealed a refusal of an inspector to set aside an enforcement notice with regard to the alteration of use of an outbuilding to a residence. He asserted that no enforcement action having been taken for four years, the enforcement could not proceed. There had been use over a longer period, but there had … Continue reading Withers v The Secretary of State for The Environment, The North Somerset District Council: Admn 9 Sep 1997
Application under Section 288 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to quash the decision of an inspector whereby he upheld the refusal of planning permission to the applicants to erect a dwelling on land in Allendale in an area of outstanding natural beauty. The inspector treated the application as one for a new … Continue reading MH Services Ltd v Secretary of State for The Environment, Transport and The: Admn 14 Feb 2002
A planning permission was granted with an agreement under section 106. A second permission was later granted. The court was now asked whether the section 106 agreement applied also to the second permission. Held: As a matter of law, the developer was, after the reserved matters approval perfected the Second Planning Permission, able to elect … Continue reading Robert Hitchins Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v Worcesteshire County Council and Others: Admn 18 Nov 2014
Land had been registered as a town or village green but wrongly so. The claimant had sought rectification, but the respondents argued that the long time elapsed after registration should defeat the request. Held: The appeal were solely as to the way the lapse of time may be relevant to whether or not it wa … Continue reading Adamson and Others v Paddico (267) Ltd: SC 5 Feb 2014
Application under section 288 of the Town and Country Planning 1990 (1990 Act) to quash a decision letter on the part of an inspector appointed by the First Defendant to hear an appeal lodged by the applicant under section 195 of the 1990 Act against refusal on the part of the Second Defendant to grant … Continue reading Royal London Mutual Insurance Society Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government: Admn 16 Oct 2013
Outer House – The petitioner environmental group objected to the grant under the 1989 Act of permission for the construction for a substantial wind farm in Central Mainland, Shetland. Lady Clark of Calton  ScotCS CSOH – 158 Bailii Electricity Act 1989, Electricity Works (Environmental Impact Assessment) (Scotland) Regulations 2000, Town and Country Planning (Scotland) … Continue reading Sustainable Shetland, Re Judicial Review: SCS 24 Sep 2013
The land-owner had planning permission to erect a barn, conditional on its use for agricultural purposes. He built inside it a house and lived there from 2002. In 2006. He then applied for a certificate of lawful use. The inspector allowed it, and the Council appealed. The Council now also argued that parliament could not … Continue reading Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government and Another v Welwyn Hatfield Borough Council: SC 6 Apr 2011
The claimant sought judicial review of a statement and letter by the respondent making a material consideration for planning authorities the intended revocation by the Respondent of Regional Spatial Strategies. The effect would be to allow the authority to reduce the number of new houses it was planning to allow for and thus to reject … Continue reading Cala Homes (South) Ltd v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government and Another: Admn 7 Feb 2011
The council had resolved to grant planning permission for a development, but before the permission was actually granted the Secretary of State had written to planning authorities saying that he intended to abolish the ‘Regional Spatial Strategies’. The objector said that the Council should reconsider in the light of this ‘highly relevant’ change. Held: The … Continue reading Hinds, Regina (on The Application of) v Blackpool Council: Admn 17 Mar 2011
The claimant challenged the order allowing the demolition of a disused listed building saying that the Direction was contrary to European law in not requiring an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). The Secretary of State said an EIA was not required for a demolition. Held: The challenge was rejected. Whether an EIA was required for a … Continue reading Save Britain’s Heritage, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government and Others: Admn 14 May 2010
The Council appealed a decision of the Assembly extending time for compliance with an enforcement notice from two months to two years. They believed that an error of law had occurred insofar as a 1973 permission had expired. The only works undertaken within the initial five year period were of demolition. The Act as it … Continue reading Ceredigion County Council v National Assembly for Wales, and E D Harrison: Admn 21 Sep 2001
Judicial Review must be timely The appellant challenged the grant of permission for a wind farm on neighbouring land. His application for judicial review had been rejected for delay and on the merits. Held: The court repeated the requirement that an application must be both timely and in any event made within three months. Both … Continue reading Finn-Kelcey v Milton Keynes Council and MK Windfarm Ltd: CA 10 Oct 2008
The campaign company sought judicial review of a decision by the respondent granting permission to develop nearby land as a golf course. Held: The application succeeded. The Secretary of State in preserving the effect of certain policies had also preserved the supporting text and reasoned justification: ‘it makes no sense to preserve naked ‘policies’ shorn … Continue reading Cherkley Campaign Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v Longshot Cherkley Court Ltd: Admn 22 Aug 2013
Dyson LJ considered the interaction between race relations law and planning permission in the context of gypsy encampments. He looked at section 71 of the 1976 Act and said: ‘In my judgment, it is important to emphasise that the section 71(1) duty is not a duty to achieve a result, namely to eliminate unlawful racial … Continue reading Baker and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government and Others: CA 28 Feb 2008
The Council applied for the committal of the defendant for an alleged breach of a without notice injunction. Notice of the injunction had been placed at the site, requiring nobody to move caravans onto the land. Held: The application succeeded. Having examined the case law the need for committal was established. The defendant was to … Continue reading Broxbourne Borough Council v Robb and Others: QBD 27 Jun 2011
Developers submitted applications for outline permission for the development of a business park. The applicant sought to quash the grant on the basis that the environmental assessment was insufficiently detailed, and contained reserved matters, and . .
The landowner appealed against an enforcement notice, saying that though she kept a large number of dogs (44), this was for domestic pleasure purposes, and was only incidental to the use as a private domestic dwelling.
Held: The appeal failed. . .
The government planned to promote a large scale rail development (HS2), announcing this in a command paper. The main issues, in summary, were, first, whether it should have been preceded by strategic environmental assessment, under the relevant . .
The council appealed against the inspector’s decision to quash its enforcement notice. The land-owner occupied a wooden structure which he said was a caravan, but the council said was a residence and an unlawful change of use of agricultural land. . .
A justified expectation of crime can be valid ground affecting planning decision. . .
The applicant had an existing planning permission. They sought and received confirmation from the local authority that the permission remained in effect. They then sought a certificate of lawful use. The letter confirming the permission had been . .
Secretary of State may take accounts of events after original decision when taking appeal. . .
How should one understand the statutory provisions – in section 61N of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 – for proceedings to challenge the steps taken by a local planning authority in making a neighbourhood plan? . .
The appellant appealed a refusal of a lawful development certificate for non-compliance with an agricultural occupancy condition. It had been originally required to be used for occupation by an agricultural worker, but was occupied in breach of that . .
The House was asked whether the Ministry of Defence was entitled to cone off a section of the A814 road without the permission of the roads authority under the Roads (Scotland) Act 1984 or the local planning authority under the Town and Country . .
The Court was asked as to the proper interpretation of paragraph 49 of the National Planning Policy Framework: ‘Housing applications should be considered in the context of the presumption in favour of sustainable development. Relevant policies for . .
‘When a local planning authority against the advice of its own professional advisers grants permission for a controversial development, what legal duty, if any, does it have to state the reasons for its decision, and in how much detail? Is such a . .
The appellants challenged the refusal to grant them injunctions to prevent Roma parking caravans on land they had purchased.
Held: Parliament had given to local authorities exclusive jurisdiction on matters of planning policy, but when an . .
The applicant, a gipsy had occupied land she had bought. Her occupation was in breach of planning control. The inspector found exceptional cirumstances for allowing her to continue to live there. The authority appealed.
Held: The inspector had . .
The company challenged an enforcement notice. It had used premises to provide temporary sleeping accommodation for more than ten years but without a planning consent to change of use. There was a break of five months after the after the first ten . .
A building was erected without planning permission. The local planning authority chose not to serve an enforcement notice but rather had invited an application for retrospective planning permission.
Held: The fact that a building has already . .
The claimant sought damages after the planning authority allowed the first defendant to conduct a manufacturing business in the course of which spraying activities took place which caused them personal injuries and loss of business.
Held: The . .
The complainants challenged a decision to grant planning permission to develop houses on land neighbouring theirs. They owned a substantial proportion of land in the neighbourhood, and they were not bringing enough land forward to allow fulfillment . .
The use of a tethered barge as a heliport constituted a change of use of the land under the river. . .
There is no power for Court of Appeal itself to give leave to appeal after High Court’s refusal of leave on an enforcement notice. The court rejected the applicant’s submission that a High Court judge’s decision refusing permission to appeal under . .
The Council complained that the builder had not fulfilled its obligations under a section 106 agreement. . .
The Council had granted planning pemission for four blocks of student accomodation. The Executive objected that it had not dealt properly with the issue the proximity of a liquified petroleum gas storage depot.
Held: Though there had been some . .
The court considered the use of injunctions to restrain breaches of planning control. The applicants were gypsies who had taken up occupation of land in mobile homes. The respondent had given them twelve months for them to find alternative . .
The applicant challenged an order requiring him to discontinue use of land on which were listed buildings in need of repair. The authority had concluded that compulsory purchase would not be sufficient to achieve the result required. The land owner . .
The land owners had sought permission to fell an oak tree subject to a tree preservation order in order to prevent further damage from its roots.
Held: The council’s appeal succeeded. The court was asked to decide whether any works to the tree . .
The claimant gypsies had bought and moved onto land in Norfolk and stayed there in breach of planning enforcement notices. The inspector upheld the notices, but advised the Council of the difficulties in finding sites and had stayed enforcement for . .
The claimant complained that the law which protected an occupier of a dwelling house from a temporary stop notice did not apply to those living in caravans, and that this was discriminatory.
Held: The claim failed. ‘usually a change of use of . .
The claimant sought a declaration that it had a tenancy for its occupation by an advertising station, and that it had protection under the 1954 Act. The defendant council said that only a licence had been granted.
Held: The grants included the . .
The council served a stop notice. The company sought compensation. The council replied that the company had no legal or equitable interest in the land affected.
Held: The company had occupied the land under a licence. A contractual licensee on . .
The applicant sought planning permission to pull down some buildings formerly used as a mushroom farm. The application was refused on the ground that it would remain available for industrial use. The applicant contended it would be low grade use. . .
Local authorities had obtained injunctions preventing the defendants from taking up occupation, where they had acquired land with a view to living on the plots in mobile homes, but where planning permission had been refused. The various defendants . .
Criminal proceedings, forming part of the general scheme of enforcement of planning control contained in Part VII of the Act, had been taken.
Held: The validity of a planning enforcement notice must be challenged in civil proceedings, not . .
The fact that a new product was made on agricultural land from produce grown elsewhere on the land did not make that production process non-agricultural. The making of wine is capable of being agricultural use, and being thus free from planning . .
Application for interim injunction to prevent traveller families occupying certain lands. . .
A metal framed marquee erected on the same site each year and kept up until October, did not require planning permission. The decision that it did because it was a building was flawed. Insufficient attention had been given to whether there were any . .
The appellants appealed a refusal of an inspector to set aside an enforcement notice with regard to the alteration of use of an outbuilding to a residence. He asserted that no enforcement action having been taken for four years, the enforcement . .
The landowners appealed a refusal to grant planning permission without there being included a condition which had been attached to an earlier permission, and which remained unfulfilled. The condition was, in effect, to allow sales from one proposed . .
The plaintiff requested that an enforcement notice should be quashed. Two earlier decision notices had already been quashed. At issue was a houseboat constructed on a floating wooden raft. There was an existing use certificate for a houseboat. Was . .
The claimant challenged the grant of planning permission for a new football ground for Fulham Football club, saying that an Environmental Impact Assessment had not been obtained, but was required.
Held: Where a planning application if . .
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
Our law-index is a substantial selection from our database. Cases here are restricted in number by date and lack the additional facilities formerly available within lawindexpro. Please do enjoy this free version of the lawindex. Case law does not ‘belong’ to lawyers. Judgments are made up of words which can be read and understood (if … Continue reading law index