Grendon v The First Secretary of State & Anor

Grendon v The First Secretary of State & Anor

The Inspector was entitled to conclude, based on the evidence and the physical attributes of the building, that it was not a dwellinghouse within the meaning of Section 171B(2) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. The Inspector properly directed himself in law by considering both the use and the physical state of the premises, and the claim was dismissed.

Parties
Claimant: Stephen Grendon; 1st Respondent: The First Secretary of State; 2nd Respondent: Cotswold District Council
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
14 July 2006
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (section 288 Town and Country Planning Act 1990) / Judgment
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Certificate of Lawful Use or Development, Definition of Dwellinghouse, Enforcement Action, Statutory Interpretation
Planning Law Administrative Law Certificate of Lawful Use or Development Definition of Dwellinghouse Enforcement Action Statutory Interpretation

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 3 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Stephen Grendon

Claimant

The First Secretary of State

1st Respondent

Cotswold District Council

2nd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review (section 288 Town and Country Planning Act 1990) / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the building in question constituted a 'dwellinghouse' under Section 171B(2) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990
  2. 2 Whether the Inspector misdirected himself in law as to the test for a dwellinghouse
  3. 3 Whether the Inspector failed to apply principles from Uratemp Ventures Ltd. v Collins

Ratio Decidendi

The Inspector was entitled to conclude, based on the evidence and the physical attributes of the building, that it was not a dwellinghouse within the meaning of Section 171B(2) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. The Inspector properly directed himself in law by considering both the use and the physical state of the premises, and the claim was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed