The landowner had obtained outline permission but with details reserved. Later full permission was granted, but the authority refused to approve matters which had already been approved in the original outline permission, saying they were out of time.
Held: The respondent did have jurisdiction to hear the land-owner’s appeal. The grant of the full permission was effectively the same as approval of the detail reserved in the outline, and the appeal was not out of time.
Obiter the court said that a sufficent test was whether the operations carried out would be permitted under the permission read in combination with the conditions.
Judges:
Woolf J
Citations:
Times 13-Oct-1983, (1983) 48 PandCR 35
Statutes:
Town and Country Planning Act 1971 245
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Approved – Oakimber Ltd v Elmbridge Borough Council CA 1991
Beldam LJ said: ‘On this reasoning it is unnecessary to consider the interesting argument addressed to the court that development carried out in breach of conditions can be regarded as development to which the permission related and whether for the . .
Cited – FG Whitley and Sons Co Ltd v Secretary of State for Wales CA 1992
The plaintiff had obtained conditional planning permission. It applied for approval of the meeting of the conditions but failed to receive a repy and had commenced work anyway. The authority then said that because the works had been begun before . .
Cited – Hart Aggregates Ltd, Regina (on the Application of) v Hartlepool Borough Council Admn 26-Apr-2005
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Planning
Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.442414
