Stevenage Borough Council v Secretary of State for Communities And Local Government & Anor

Stevenage Borough Council v Secretary of State for Communities And Local Government & Anor

The 2006 planning permission, when properly construed with reference to the submitted plans and statements, included the internal sub-division of Unit 7. Therefore, the Inspector did not err in law in granting the certificate of lawful development for unrestricted retail use. The alternative arguments based on section 75(3) and the creation of a new chapter in planning history were rejected as insufficient to remove the original restrictions if the permission had been confined to external works only.

Parties
Claimant: Stevenage Borough Council; First Defendant: Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government; Second Defendant: Aberdeen Property Investors (UK) Limited (formerly Goodman Property Investors)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
03 June 2010
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (planning) / Judgment on Application to Quash Inspector's Decision
Outcome
Application to quash dismissed
Legal Topics
Interpretation of Planning Permissions, Lawful Development Certificates, Section 75 Town and Country Planning Act, Material Change of Use, Planning Conditions
Planning Law Administrative Law Interpretation of Planning Permissions Lawful Development Certificates Section 75 Town and Country Planning Act Material Change of Use Planning Conditions

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 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Stevenage Borough Council

Claimant

Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government

First Defendant

Aberdeen Property Investors (UK) Limited (formerly Goodman Property Investors)

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review (planning) / Judgment on Application to Quash Inspector's Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the 2006 planning permission included internal sub-division works to Unit 7
  2. 2 Whether the Inspector erred in law in granting a certificate of lawful development for unrestricted retail use
  3. 3 Whether section 75(3) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 applied to remove previous restrictions

Ratio Decidendi

The 2006 planning permission, when properly construed with reference to the submitted plans and statements, included the internal sub-division of Unit 7. Therefore, the Inspector did not err in law in granting the certificate of lawful development for unrestricted retail use. The alternative arguments based on section 75(3) and the creation of a new chapter in planning history were rejected as insufficient to remove the original restrictions if the permission had been confined to external works only.

Court Disposition

Application to quash dismissed

Orders

  • The application to quash the Inspector's decision dated 6 April 2009 is dismissed.