Hydro, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government [2015] EWHC 1654 (Admin) (17 April 2015)

Hydro, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government [2015] EWHC 1654 (Admin) (17 April 2015)

The Inspector was entitled to require removal of structures integral to the unauthorised mixed use, even if they could hypothetically be used for lawful residential purposes, as Article 1 Protocol 1 ECHR does not require retention of harmful structures on a merely hypothetical basis. The Inspector properly considered all relevant matters including need, objections, and lack of enforcement, and gave adequate reasons for his decision.

Citation
[2015] EWHC 1654 (Admin)
Parties
Claimant: Kestrel Hydro; First Defendant: Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government; Second Defendant: Spelthorne Borough Council
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 April 2015
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Statutory Appeal Under S.289 Town and Country Planning Act 1990 / High Court (administrative Court, Planning Court) Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Green Belt Policy, Enforcement Notice, Material Change of Use, Operational Development, Article 1 Protocol 1 ECHR, Proportionality, Planning Permission, Lawful Use, Need Assessment, Duty to Give Reasons
Planning Law Administrative Law Human Rights Green Belt Policy Enforcement Notice Material Change of Use Operational Development Article 1 Protocol 1 ECHR +5 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 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kestrel Hydro

Claimant

Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government

First Defendant

Spelthorne Borough Council

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Statutory Appeal Under S.289 Town and Country Planning Act 1990 / High Court (administrative Court, Planning Court) Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the enforcement notice validly required removal of structures associated with an unauthorised mixed use
  2. 2 Whether operational development immune from enforcement could be required to be removed
  3. 3 Whether Article 1 Protocol 1 ECHR required retention of structures that could be used for lawful purposes

Ratio Decidendi

The Inspector was entitled to require removal of structures integral to the unauthorised mixed use, even if they could hypothetically be used for lawful residential purposes, as Article 1 Protocol 1 ECHR does not require retention of harmful structures on a merely hypothetical basis. The Inspector properly considered all relevant matters including need, objections, and lack of enforcement, and gave adequate reasons for his decision.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Appellant to pay First Defendant's costs assessed at £8,662