Brentwood Borough Council v Thursting & Ors [2020] EWHC 2040 (QB) (27 July 2020)
There is a strong prima facie case of actual or apprehended breach of planning control by the first defendant, including preparatory steps and lack of transparency with the planning authority. The balance of convenience and justice, having regard to the public interest in protecting greenbelt land and preventing unauthorised development, justifies continuation of the broad interim injunction in substantially the same terms as previously ordered, including prohibitions on anticipatory steps. The order is proportionate, clear, and necessary at this interim stage.
- Citation
- [2020] EWHC 2040
- Parties
- Claimant: Brentwood Borough Council; First Defendant: Jack Thursting; Second Defendant: Persons Unknown (Undertaking Operational Development on the Land Known as 'Land on the North Side of Chelmsford Road' HM Land Registry Title EX981807 Without a Lawful Planning Consent and/or Seeking to Change the Use of the Land Including a Change in Use to a Gypsy Caravan Site Without Lawful Planning Consent)
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 27 July 2020
- Procedural Posture
- Interim Injunction Application Under Section 187 B Town and Country Planning Act 1990 / Return Date Hearing for Continuation of Interim Injunction
- Outcome
- Interim injunction continued in substantially the same terms as previously ordered; costs of the 24 July 2020 hearing awarded to the claimant; other costs reserved to final hearing.
- Legal Topics
- Interim Injunctions, Planning Control, Greenbelt Land, Operational Development, Persons Unknown, Costs Orders
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Brentwood Borough Council
Claimant
Jack Thursting
First Defendant
Persons Unknown (Undertaking Operational Development on the Land Known as 'Land on the North Side of Chelmsford Road' HM Land Registry Title EX981807 Without a Lawful Planning Consent and/or Seeking to Change the Use of the Land Including a Change in Use to a Gypsy Caravan Site Without Lawful Planning Consent)
Second Defendant
Procedural Posture
Interim Injunction Application Under Section 187 B Town and Country Planning Act 1990 / Return Date Hearing for Continuation of Interim Injunction
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether there is a serious issue to be tried regarding breach or apprehended breach of planning control
- 2 Whether the interim injunction should be continued, discharged, narrowed, or temporally limited
- 3 Whether the breadth of the injunction is justified, including prohibitions on anticipatory or preparatory steps not intrinsically breaches of planning control
Ratio Decidendi
There is a strong prima facie case of actual or apprehended breach of planning control by the first defendant, including preparatory steps and lack of transparency with the planning authority. The balance of convenience and justice, having regard to the public interest in protecting greenbelt land and preventing unauthorised development, justifies continuation of the broad interim injunction in substantially the same terms as previously ordered, including prohibitions on anticipatory steps. The order is proportionate, clear, and necessary at this interim stage.
Court Disposition
Interim injunction continued in substantially the same terms as previously ordered; costs of the 24 July 2020 hearing awarded to the claimant; other costs reserved to final hearing.
Orders
- Defendants prohibited from using or developing the land in breach of planning control, including specified prohibitions on bringing materials, caravans, or structures onto the land; residing or stationing accommodation; installing utilities; undertaking development without permission; bringing plant or machinery for...
- Order replaces previous order of 17 July 2020.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment