The claimant sought a injunction to restrain the defendant council from executing enforcement notices regarding the use of the claimant’s land for residence by several traveller families. He argued that the council had failed to state its exact intentions on enforcement, and that it was feared that it would exceed the steps necessary for enforcement. That argument had been accepted, but residents then went on again to challenge the decision to implement the enforcement, an argument already rejected by the Court of Appeal: ‘the question that I have to decide is whether the Council can demolish and remove a building that has been constructed on the hard standing (and was integral with it) if it was in existence in breach of planning control at the time of the enforcement notice and its demolition or removal is not mentioned in the notice.’
Held: The Council could do anything reasonably necessary to achieve compliance with the steps required by the enforcement notice provided that such action is not something that could itself have been the subject of an enforcement notice. Where buildings could have been mentioned but were not, then they could not be demolished.
If, as suggested by the claimant but denied by the Council, certain of the structures were not caravans within the 1968, then the enforcement notices could not be applied to them.
There remained triable issues between the parties, and a speedy trial should be arranged.
Edwards-Stuart J
[2011] EWHC 2416 (QB)
Bailii
Town and Country Planning Act 1990 178, Caravan Sites Act 1968 13
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Attorney General and Another v Great Eastern Railway Company HL 27-May-1880
An Act of Parliament authorised a company to construct a railway. Two other companies combined and contracted with the first to supply rolling stock. An injunction was brought to try to restrain this, saying that such a contract was not explicitly . .
See Also – Basildon District Council v McCarthy and others CA 22-Jan-2009
Challenge to decision of the council to take direct action to enforce planning notice.
Held: The Council’s decision had been lawfully and properly reached, so that the challenge to the enforcement notices failed. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Land, Planning
Updated: 09 November 2021; Ref: scu.444871
