Case Law Update

2. Case Law Update Chris Charlton Chris Charlton, Partner Clarke Willmott LLP T: 0845 209 1317 E: christopher.charlton@clarkewillmott.com W: www.clarkewillmott.com

3. Appeal – Sevenoaks District Council • Reference: APP/G2245/X/12/2178581 • Farm Bungalow, Oakdale Lane, Crockham Hill, Edenbridge • Refusal of LDC for the construction of a second dwelling under 1964 Planning Permission where first dwelling had been built not in accordance with the approved plans

4. Walsall MBC v Secretary of State for Communities & Local Government • Dartford BC v Secretary of State for Communities & Local Government • Unreported • Where the High Court have determined that there is no reasonable prospect of success for an appeal to the Court of Appeal the Court of Appeal has no jurisdiction to hear such an appeal under s16(1) of the Senior Courts Act 1981

5. Westminster City Council v Addbins Ltd • [2012] EWHC 3716 (QB) • Advertisement Regulations injunction proceedings. The Court refused to strike out proceedings to commit the director of a company where he complained he had not been properly served

6. Williams v Secretary of State for Communities & Local Government • [2012] EWHC 3466 (Admin) • Appeal upheld.  Where a planning permission did not specify how a barn conversion should be carried out or how much original building must be retained it was lawful to demolish and reconstruct the building

7. Hertfordshire CC v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government  • [2012] EWCA Civ 1473 • Appeal upheld where enforcement notice alleged intensification of use of a waste recycling business.  Useful discussion of what constitutes a material change of use by virtue of intensification

8. Allsop v Derbyshire Dales DC • [2012] EWHC 3562 (Admin) • The service of s 215 notice was inappropriate where the use of the land was lawful.  This was a case where a s102 notice was more appropriate

9. Moore v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government • [2012] EWCA Civ 1202 • Use of a dwelling house for holiday let.  Useful discussion of the characteristics of C3 use where property also used for holiday accommodation

10. R (on the application of Save Woolley Valley Action Group Ltd) v Bath and North East Somerset Council • [2012] EWHC 2161 (Admin) • Creation of a pond and use of mobile poultry units.  LPA failed to properly assess whether development had taken place under s55 as it had not taken Directive 85/337into account

11. R (on the application of Harbige) v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government • [2012] EWHC 1128 (Admin) • A use may change between classes where this is permitted by the Use Classes Order and such changes do not constitute development even where the uses are unlawful.  Thus an immunity might be achieved from enforcement action where land is used for more than one purpose provided the changes are permitted by the Use Classes Order

12. R (on the application of Tait) v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government • [2012] EWHC 643 (Admin) • Appeal upheld where an Inspector held a site visit without the presence of the Appellant

13. Westminster City Council v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government • [2013] EWHC 23 (Admin) • Discussion of the requirement to impose restrictions limiting a Certificate of Lawful Use

14. Thomas v Merthyr Tydfil Car Auction Ltd • [2012] EWHC 2654 (QB) • The grant of permission does not protect a user of land where a nuisance is caused

15. R (on the application of Lucchetti) v South Norfolk DC • [2012] EWHC 3557 (Admin) • A tale of woe where a developer sets out to beat the system.  Business use lost where buildings demolished on green belt land

16. And Finally Reigate and Banstead v Fidler • The saga continues … • 3 applications for lawful development certificates • All appeals dismissed with cost (partial)

17. Questions