Thurrock Borough Council v Secretary Of State For Environment Transport & Regions & Anor [2001] EWHC Admin 128 (22nd February, 2001)

Thurrock Borough Council v Secretary Of State For Environment Transport & Regions & Anor [2001] EWHC Admin 128 (22nd February, 2001)

The Inspector erred in law by treating an unlawful change of use as if it were a lawful accrued use, failing to properly assess the character and intensity of the use over the relevant period for immunity, and by inadequately considering the evidential basis for the fall-back position and whether a replacement building would be incidental to the enjoyment of the dwelling house. The appeals under Sections 288 and 289 are allowed and the Inspector's decisions are quashed for redetermination.

Citation
[2001] EWHC Admin 128
Parties
Claimant: Thurrock Borough Council; First Defendant: Secretary of State for the Environment Transport and the Regions; Second Defendant: Terry Holding
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Statutory Planning Appeal / High Court Judgment on Appeals Under Sections 288 and 289 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990
Outcome
Appeals allowed; Inspector's decisions quashed and matters remitted for redetermination.
Legal Topics
Enforcement Notice, Change of Use, Green Belt Policy, Permitted Development, Certificate of Lawfulness, Planning Appeals, Judicial Review
Administrative Law Planning Law Local Government Law Enforcement Notice Change of Use Green Belt Policy Permitted Development Certificate of Lawfulness +2 more

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 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Thurrock Borough Council

Claimant

Secretary of State for the Environment Transport and the Regions

First Defendant

Terry Holding

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Statutory Planning Appeal / High Court Judgment on Appeals Under Sections 288 and 289 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Inspector adopted the correct legal approach to immunity from enforcement for change of use under Section 174(2)(d) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990
  2. 2 Whether the Inspector erred in granting planning permission for a building in the Green Belt based on 'very special circumstances' and the fall-back position
  3. 3 Whether the Inspector properly considered whether a replacement building would be incidental to the enjoyment of the dwelling house

Ratio Decidendi

The Inspector erred in law by treating an unlawful change of use as if it were a lawful accrued use, failing to properly assess the character and intensity of the use over the relevant period for immunity, and by inadequately considering the evidential basis for the fall-back position and whether a replacement building would be incidental to the enjoyment of the dwelling house. The appeals under Sections 288 and 289 are allowed and the Inspector's decisions are quashed for redetermination.

Court Disposition

Appeals allowed; Inspector's decisions quashed and matters remitted for redetermination.

Orders

  • Inspector's order quashing the enforcement notice is quashed.
  • Inspector's grant of planning permission for the aircraft hangar and hard standing is quashed.