Crosswait v Secretary of State for Communities & Local Goernment [2009] EWHC 2119 (Admin) (12 August 2009)

Crosswait v Secretary of State for Communities & Local Goernment [2009] EWHC 2119 (Admin) (12 August 2009)

The Inspector was entitled on the evidence to find a significant break in continuity of garden/recreational use, such that the land was not immune from enforcement action under section 171B(3); the Inspector's summary and evaluation of the evidence was adequate and not vitiated by failure to mention every detail.

Citation
[2009] EWHC 2119 (Admin)
Parties
Claimant: Martin Crosswait; First Defendant: Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government; Second Defendant: City of Bradford Metropolitan District Council
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
12 August 2009
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Statutory Appeal (planning) / Application for Permission to Appeal Under Section 289 Town and Country Planning Act 1990
Outcome
Permission to appeal refused
Legal Topics
Enforcement Notice, Change of Use, Immunity From Enforcement, Continuity of Use, Section 171 B Town and Country Planning Act 1990
Planning Law Administrative Law Enforcement Notice Change of Use Immunity From Enforcement Continuity of Use Section 171 B 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 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Martin Crosswait

Claimant

Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government

First Defendant

City of Bradford Metropolitan District Council

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Statutory Appeal (planning) / Application for Permission to Appeal Under Section 289 Town and Country Planning Act 1990

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Inspector erred in law in concluding there was a significant break in continuity of garden/recreational use of the land such that enforcement action was not precluded under section 171B(3) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990

Ratio Decidendi

The Inspector was entitled on the evidence to find a significant break in continuity of garden/recreational use, such that the land was not immune from enforcement action under section 171B(3); the Inspector's summary and evaluation of the evidence was adequate and not vitiated by failure to mention every detail.

Court Disposition

Permission to appeal refused

Orders

  • Application for permission to appeal refused
  • Claimant to pay First Defendant's costs in the sum of £4521.00