The landowner had concealed his new building (a mock Tudor castle) under straw bales 40′ high, and now appealed against dismissal of his challenge to enforcement orders. He said that the building had been substantially completed more than four years previously.
Held: The appeal failed. The inspector had found the erection or removal of the straw bales had been an integral and essential part of building operations that were intended to deceive the local planning authority and achieve by deception lawful status for a dwelling house built in breach of planning control. The building was not completed till they were removed.
Sir Thayne Forbes
[2010] EWHC 143 (Admin), Times 09-Feb-2010, [2010] NPC 15, [2010] 6 EG 115
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
Distinguished – Sage v Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions and others HL 10-Apr-2003
The appellant had challenged an enforcement notice requiring him to pull down a partially built house. The issue was when the four year limitation period had commenced. Did the four year limitation period commence when the works were complete, or . .
Cited by:
Cited – Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government and Another v Welwyn Hatfield Borough Council SC 6-Apr-2011
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 . .
These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 20 June 2021; Ref: scu.396625
