Regina v Wicks: HL 21 May 1997

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 during a defence on enforcement. In looking at Part VII of the Act, the scheme of enforcement of planning control which it exhibits and the history of its provisions, the conclusion is that ‘enforcement notice’ means a notice issued by the planning authority which is formally valid and has not been quashed. The duty of the landowner is clear: if the enforcement notice has not been quashed, he must obey it. ‘the distinction between substantive and procedural invalidity appears to cut across the distinction between grounds of invalidity which require no extrinsic evidence and those which do.’
Lord Browne-Wilkinson, Lord Jauncey of Tullichettle, Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead, Lord Hoffmann, Lord Hope of Craighead
Times 26-May-1997, Gazette 17-Sep-1997, [1997] UKHL 21, [1998] AC 92, [1997] 2 All ER 801, [1997] 2 WLR 876
House of Lords, Bailii
Town and Country Planning Act 1990 Part IV
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal fromRegina v Wicks CACD 19-Apr-1995
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. . .
DoubtedBugg v Director of Public Prosecutions; Director of Public Prosecutions v Percy QBD 1993
The defendants appealed against convictions for having entered military bases contrary to various bye-laws. They challenged the validity of the bye-laws.
Held: The validity of a bye-law could be challenged in criminal proceedings, but where . .

Cited by:
CitedBuckinghamshire County Council v North West Estates plc and others ChD 31-May-2002
The planning authority sought injunctions for enforcement notices. The landowner argued that human rights law required the court when looking at such a request to look at the entire planning history.
Held: Although the court could look to a . .
Appealed toRegina v Wicks CACD 19-Apr-1995
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. . .
CitedBoddington v British Transport Police HL 2-Apr-1998
The defendant had been convicted, under regulations made under the Act, of smoking in a railway carriage. He sought to challenge the validity of the regulations themselves. He wanted to argue that the power to ban smoking on carriages did not . .
CitedRegina (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
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 . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 03 January 2021; Ref: scu.158896