The second respondent sought a certificate from the Council determining that the lawful use of its store extended to sales of unlimited categories of goods including food. A certificate to that effect was refused by the Council, but granted by a planning inspector on appeal, and upheld by the lower courts. The Council, as local planning authority, now appealed.
Held: The appeal succeeded. The obvious and only natural interpretation of those parts of the document is that the Council was approving what was applied for: the variation of one condition from the original wording to the proposed wording, in effect substituting one for the other. There is nothing to indicate an intention to discharge the condition altogether, or to remove the restriction on the sale of food goods. The parties agreed that the grant was effective and it must be read within normal and accepted usage. The wording was clear, and the absence of a reason for the condition did not affect its validity.
A permission under section 73 can only take effect as an independent permission to carry out the same development as previously permitted, but subject to the new or amended conditions.
Judges:
Lord Reed, Deputy President, Lord Carnwath, Lady Black, Lord Lloyd-Jones, Lord Briggs
Citations:
[2019] UKSC 33, UKSC 2018/0099, [2019] 4 All ER 981, [2019] 2 P and CR 18, [2019] PTSR 1388, [2020] JPL 31, [2019] 1 WLR 4317
Links:
Bailii, Bailii Summary, SC, SC Summary, SC Summary Video, SC 2019 May 21 am Video, SC 2019 May 21 pm Video
Statutes:
Town and Country Planning Act 1990 73
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal from – London Borough of Lambeth v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government and Others CA 20-Apr-2018
The parties disputed the validity of the time-limit condition (condition 1), which required the ‘development to which this permission relates’ to be begun within three years.
Held: The Court upheld the inspector’s decision that this condition . .
At First Instance – London Borough of Lambeth v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government and Others Admn 3-Oct-2017
Challenge to grant of certificate of lawful use for premises for the sale of food (other than hot food).
Held: Lambeth’s appeal failed. . .
Cited – Pye v Secretary of State for Environment and North Cornwall District Council Admn 5-May-1998
An application was made under section 73 to develop land without compliance with conditions previously attached to a planning permission, the relevant condition being that the development commence within five years of the date of planning . .
Cited – Regina v Leicester City Council ex parte Powergen UK Limited CA 2000
. .
Cited – I’m Your Man Ltd v Secretary of State for the Environment QBD 25-Sep-1998
An application for temporary planning permission for seven years had been made, but the grant made no mention of the temporary nature and it so became a permanent unqualified grant. . .
Cited – Trump International Golf Club Scotland Ltd and Another v The Scottish Ministers (Scotland) SC 16-Dec-2015
The appellant challenged the grant of permission to the erection of wind turbines within sight of its golf course.
Held: The appeal failed. The challenge under section 36 was supported neither by the language or structure of the 1989 Act, and . .
Cited – Chartbrook Ltd v Persimmon Homes Ltd and Others HL 1-Jul-2009
Mutual Knowledge admissible to construe contract
The parties had entered into a development contract in respect of a site in Wandsworth, under which balancing compensation was to be paid. They disagreed as to its calculation. Persimmon sought rectification to reflect the negotiations.
Held: . .
Cited – Attorney General of Belize and others v Belize Telecom Ltd and Another PC 18-Mar-2009
(Belize) A company had been formed to manage telecommunications in Belize. The parties disputed the interpretation of its articles. Shares had been sold, but the company was structured so as to leave a degree of control with the government. It was . .
Cited – Brayhead (Ascot) Ltd v Berkshire County Council CA 1964
Planning permission had been granted subject to conditions, but no reasons had been given for the imposition of those conditions. The Order required the local planning authority to state its reasons in writing if it decided to grant planning . .
Cited – Reid, Regina (on the Application Of) v Secretary of State for Transport and Local Government and Another Admn 7-Oct-2002
Planning permission was granted subject to conditions. Later one condition was lifted on a renewed application. It referred to the earlier permission, but not the earlier conditions explicitly.
Held: The permission was not clear, and therefore . .
Cited – Pioneer Aggregates (UK) Limited v Secretary of State for the Environment HL 1985
The House considered the concept of a spent planning consent.
Held: This was a mineral operation and every shovelful dug amounted to another act of development. Therefore, although it had been begun, the planning permission was not spent and . .
Cited – Powergen UK Plc v Leicester City Council and Another CA 19-May-2000
. .
Cited – Brayhead (Ascot) Ltd v Berkshire County Council CA 1964
Planning permission had been granted subject to conditions, but no reasons had been given for the imposition of those conditions. The Order required the local planning authority to state its reasons in writing if it decided to grant planning . .
Cited – Pioneer Aggregates (UK) Limited v Secretary of State for the Environment HL 1985
The House considered the concept of a spent planning consent.
Held: This was a mineral operation and every shovelful dug amounted to another act of development. Therefore, although it had been begun, the planning permission was not spent and . .
Cited – Chartbrook Ltd v Persimmon Homes Ltd and Others HL 1-Jul-2009
Mutual Knowledge admissible to construe contract
The parties had entered into a development contract in respect of a site in Wandsworth, under which balancing compensation was to be paid. They disagreed as to its calculation. Persimmon sought rectification to reflect the negotiations.
Held: . .
Cited – Attorney General of Belize and others v Belize Telecom Ltd and Another PC 18-Mar-2009
(Belize) A company had been formed to manage telecommunications in Belize. The parties disputed the interpretation of its articles. Shares had been sold, but the company was structured so as to leave a degree of control with the government. It was . .
Cited – Sevenoaks District Council v First Secretary of State 2005
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Planning
Updated: 16 April 2022; Ref: scu.639248