Chelmsford City Council v Leisure Parks Real Estate (Holdings) Ltd & Ors [2021] EWHC 613 (QB) (17 March 2021)

Chelmsford City Council v Leisure Parks Real Estate (Holdings) Ltd & Ors [2021] EWHC 613 (QB) (17 March 2021)

The disputed land falls outside the boundary of the 2013 planning permission as shown on the incorporated site plan; the plan is unambiguous as to the relevant boundary (Boundary Line A), and extrinsic materials cannot be used to expand the boundary. Works on the disputed land are not permitted development under the CSL or the 2015 Order, as there is no requirement to carry out such works for caravans without planning permission. It is just and proportionate to grant a final injunction to restrain further breaches of planning control.

Citation
[2021] EWHC 613
Parties
Claimant: Chelmsford City Council; First Defendant: Leisure Parks Real Estate (Holdings) Ltd; Second Defendant: Leisure Parks Real Estate Ltd; Third Defendant: James Robert Crickmore; Fourth Defendant: Colin Crickmore; Fifth Defendant: Maurice Sines; Sixth Defendant: Persons Unknown
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 March 2021
Procedural Posture
Application for Injunction Under S.187 B Town and Country Planning Act 1990 / Final Hearing on Whether to Grant a Final Injunction
Outcome
Final injunction granted against the Defendants (including the Second Defendant) restraining occupation and further works on the disputed land adjacent to Boundary Line A; injunction not extended to land outside the 2013 Permission or to 'persons unknown'.
Legal Topics
Interpretation of Planning Permissions, Permitted Development Rights, Injunctions Under S.187 B Town and Country Planning Act 1990, Caravan Site Licensing
Planning Law Public Law Interpretation of Planning Permissions Permitted Development Rights Injunctions Under S.187 B Town and Country Planning Act 1990 Caravan Site Licensing

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 15 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Chelmsford City Council

Claimant

Leisure Parks Real Estate (Holdings) Ltd

First Defendant

Leisure Parks Real Estate Ltd

Second Defendant

James Robert Crickmore

Third Defendant

Colin Crickmore

Fourth Defendant

Maurice Sines

Fifth Defendant

Persons Unknown

Sixth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application for Injunction Under S.187 B Town and Country Planning Act 1990 / Final Hearing on Whether to Grant a Final Injunction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the disputed land falls within the boundary of the 2013 planning permission
  2. 2 Whether works on the disputed land are permitted development under the Caravan Site Licence (CSL) and the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 2015
  3. 3 Whether the court should exercise its discretion to grant a final injunction

Ratio Decidendi

The disputed land falls outside the boundary of the 2013 planning permission as shown on the incorporated site plan; the plan is unambiguous as to the relevant boundary (Boundary Line A), and extrinsic materials cannot be used to expand the boundary. Works on the disputed land are not permitted development under the CSL or the 2015 Order, as there is no requirement to carry out such works for caravans without planning permission. It is just and proportionate to grant a final injunction to restrain further breaches of planning control.

Court Disposition

Final injunction granted against the Defendants (including the Second Defendant) restraining occupation and further works on the disputed land adjacent to Boundary Line A; injunction not extended to land outside the 2013 Permission or to 'persons unknown'.

Orders

  • Defendants are restrained from occupying or causing others to occupy caravans on the disputed land adjacent to Boundary Line A.
  • Defendants are restrained from carrying out further works on the disputed land adjacent to Boundary Line A.