Chelmsford City Council v Leisure Parks Real Estate (Holdings) Ltd & Ors

Chelmsford City Council v Leisure Parks Real Estate (Holdings) Ltd & Ors

The disputed works were outside the boundary of the 2013 planning permission as shown on the incorporated Site Plan; the Caravan Site Licence did not confer permitted development rights for works on land without planning permission; and the circumstances justified the grant of a final injunction to restrain unlawful development.

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
Injunction Application Under S.187 B Town and Country Planning Act 1990 / Final Judgment
Outcome
Final injunction granted against Defendants (including Second Defendant) restraining occupation and further works on disputed land adjacent to Boundary Line A.
Legal Topics
Interpretation of Planning Permissions, Permitted Development Rights, Injunctions, Caravan Site Licence, Green Belt Protection
Planning Law Administrative Law Interpretation of Planning Permissions Permitted Development Rights Injunctions Caravan Site Licence Green Belt Protection

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 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

Injunction Application Under S.187 B Town and Country Planning Act 1990 / Final Judgment

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 under the Caravan Site Licence as permitted development
  3. 3 Whether the court should exercise its discretion to grant a final injunction

Ratio Decidendi

The disputed works were outside the boundary of the 2013 planning permission as shown on the incorporated Site Plan; the Caravan Site Licence did not confer permitted development rights for works on land without planning permission; and the circumstances justified the grant of a final injunction to restrain unlawful development.

Court Disposition

Final injunction granted against Defendants (including Second Defendant) restraining occupation and further works on disputed land adjacent to Boundary Line A.

Orders

  • Prohibition of all occupation (not limited to residential) of caravans on disputed land adjacent to Boundary Line A.
  • Defendants required to cease use of disputed land and return it to grass.