Wells v Minister of Housing and Local Government: CA 1967

It had been the practice of planning authorities, acting through their officers, to tell applicants whether or not planning permission was necessary. A letter was written by the Council Engineer telling the applicants that no permission was necessary. The applicants acted on it.
Held: The planning authority could not go back on it. Lord Denning MR said: ‘It has been their practice to tell applicants that no planning permission is necessary. Are they now to be allowed to say that this practice was all wrong and their letters were of no effect? I do not think so. I take the law to be that a defect in procedure can be cured and an irregularity can be waived, even by a public authority, so as to render valid that which would otherwise be invalid.’
Lord Denning MR, Lord Justice Megaw
[1967] 1 WLR 1000
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedLever (Finance) Ltd v City of Westminster CA 22-Jul-1970
The appellant developers had obtained detailed planning approval for fourteen houses, but after adjustments for a building line, moving several properties distances of several feet toward other properties, further plans were submitted without . .
CitedWestern Fish Products Ltd v Penwith District Council and Another CA 22-May-1978
Estoppel Cannot Oust Statutory Discretion
The plaintiff had been refused planning permission for a factory. The refusals were followed by the issue of Enforcement Notices and Stop Notices. The plaintiff said that they had been given re-assurances upon which they had relied.
Held: The . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 04 June 2021; Ref: scu.443221