LONDON BOROUGH OF BRENT v SECRETARY OF STATE FOR HOUSING COMMUNITIES AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT

LONDON BOROUGH OF BRENT v SECRETARY OF STATE FOR HOUSING COMMUNITIES AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT

The inspector acted outside the powers conferred by the TCPA 1990 by granting a certificate of lawful use or development without considering whether enforcement action could still be taken under section 191(2)(a), as required. This was a fundamental error of law, and the decision must be quashed.

Parties
Claimant: London Borough of Brent; First Defendant: Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government; Second Defendant: Ebele Muorah
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 July 2022
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (planning) / Judgment on Application to Quash Decision Under Section 288 TCPA 1990
Outcome
Claim allowed; decision quashed
Legal Topics
Certificate of Lawfulness, Enforcement Notice, Consistency in Decision Making, Natural Justice, Judicial Review, Town and Country Planning Act 1990
Administrative Law Planning Law Certificate of Lawfulness Enforcement Notice Consistency in Decision Making Natural Justice Judicial Review Town and Country Planning Act 1990

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 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

London Borough of Brent

Claimant

Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government

First Defendant

Ebele Muorah

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review (planning) / Judgment on Application to Quash Decision Under Section 288 TCPA 1990

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the inspector erred in law by granting a certificate of lawful use or development (CLEUD) contrary to section 191(2) of the TCPA 1990
  2. 2 Whether the inspector failed to have regard to the principle of consistency in decision making
  3. 3 Whether there was a breach of natural justice in the conduct of the CLEUD appeal

Ratio Decidendi

The inspector acted outside the powers conferred by the TCPA 1990 by granting a certificate of lawful use or development without considering whether enforcement action could still be taken under section 191(2)(a), as required. This was a fundamental error of law, and the decision must be quashed.

Court Disposition

Claim allowed; decision quashed

Orders

  • The First Defendant’s decision under section 195(2) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to allow the CLEUD Appeal is quashed.