Rastrum Ltd & Anor v Secretary of State for Communities & Local Government & Anor

Rastrum Ltd & Anor v Secretary of State for Communities & Local Government & Anor

When the period for enforcement action against the 1987 operations expired, those operations became lawful. Therefore, the development was lawfully commenced and the 1981 permission and 1984 approval are extant. The District Council should have granted a certificate of lawfulness. The Inspector erred in not allowing the appeal on this ground.

Parties
First Claimant: Rastrum Limited; Second Claimant: Mr R A Benge; First Defendant: Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government; Second Defendant: Rother District Council
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
04 February 2009
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Statutory Appeal / Judgment on Consolidated Claims Under Section 288 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990
Outcome
Application allowed; refusal of certificate quashed; matter remitted for further consideration on legitimate expectation and abuse of power if necessary.
Legal Topics
Certificate of Lawful Use, Legitimate Expectation, Abuse of Power, Enforcement of Planning Permissions, Section 106 Agreements
Planning Law Administrative Law Public Law Certificate of Lawful Use Legitimate Expectation Abuse of Power Enforcement of Planning Permissions Section 106 Agreements

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rastrum Limited

First Claimant

Mr R A Benge

Second Claimant

Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government

First Defendant

Rother District Council

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Statutory Appeal / Judgment on Consolidated Claims Under Section 288 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether commencement of works in breach of condition rendered the planning permission extant
  2. 2 Whether immunity from enforcement action rendered the works lawful
  3. 3 Whether legitimate expectation or abuse of power prevented the local authority from refusing a certificate of lawful use

Ratio Decidendi

When the period for enforcement action against the 1987 operations expired, those operations became lawful. Therefore, the development was lawfully commenced and the 1981 permission and 1984 approval are extant. The District Council should have granted a certificate of lawfulness. The Inspector erred in not allowing the appeal on this ground.

Court Disposition

Application allowed; refusal of certificate quashed; matter remitted for further consideration on legitimate expectation and abuse of power if necessary.

Orders

  • District Council's refusal to grant a certificate of lawful use quashed
  • Matter remitted for further investigation into legitimate expectation and abuse of power if required