Maldon District Council v Hammond

Maldon District Council v Hammond

Section 173(11) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 does not confer deemed planning permission for car repair and storage activities not alleged as breaches in the enforcement notice; the evidence did not establish a material change of use for such activities over the relevant period.

Parties
Claimant/respondent: Maldon District Council; Defendant/appellant: Michael Roy Hammond
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
30 July 2004
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Queen’s Bench Division to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Enforcement Notices, Deemed Planning Permission, Change of Use, Ancillary Use, Section 173(11) Town and Country Planning Act 1990
Planning Law Administrative Law Enforcement Notices Deemed Planning Permission Change of Use Ancillary Use Section 173(11) 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 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Maldon District Council

Claimant/respondent

Michael Roy Hammond

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Queen’s Bench Division to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether section 173(11) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 confers deemed planning permission for car repair and storage activities not specified in an enforcement notice
  2. 2 Whether the evidence established a material change of use for car repair/storage over the relevant period

Ratio Decidendi

Section 173(11) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 does not confer deemed planning permission for car repair and storage activities not alleged as breaches in the enforcement notice; the evidence did not establish a material change of use for such activities over the relevant period.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Stay imposed by Sedley LJ lifted
  • No order as to costs save for assessment of applicant’s legal service commission fund costs