The applicant, a gipsy had occupied land she had bought. Her occupation was in breach of planning control. The inspector found exceptional cirumstances for allowing her to continue to live there. The authority appealed.
Held: The inspector had failed to take sufficient account of the unlawfulness fo her occupation. It was important that the concept of exceptional circumstances should not be watered down in this way, and the decision notice was set aside.
Judges:
Lord Justice Mance Lord Justice Pill Lord Justice Longmore
Citations:
[2003] EWCA Civ 687, [2004] JPL 207, [2003] NPC 68, [2004] 1 P and CR 8
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal from – South Bucks District Council and Another v Porter Admn 17-Sep-2002
The court dismissed an application by the council under section 288 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 seeking to quash a decision of the Secretary of State given by his duly appointed inspector by letter dated 19 February 2002. The inspector . .
Cited – Chapman v United Kingdom; similar ECHR 18-Jan-2001
The question arose as to the refusal of planning permission and the service of an enforcement notice against Mrs Chapman who wished to place her caravan on a plot of land in the Green Belt. The refusal of planning permission and the enforcement . .
Cited – Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council v Secretary of State for Environment, Transport and the Regions 2002
It is important that the need for ‘very special circumstances’ for allowing an exception to development control is not watered down. . .
Cited – Westminster City Council v Great Portland Estates plc HL 31-Oct-1984
The House was asked whether the 1971 Act permitted the relevant authorities, by resort to their development plans, to support the retention of traditional industries or was the ambit of the Act such as to permit only ‘land use’ aims to be pursued? . .
Cited by:
Appeal from – South Buckinghamshire District Council and Another v Porter (No 2) HL 1-Jul-2004
Mrs Porter was a Romany gipsy who bought land in the Green Belt in 1985 and lived there with her husband in breach of planning control. The inspector gave her personal permission to continue use, and it had been appealed and cross appealed on the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Planning
Updated: 25 November 2022; Ref: scu.183722
