Baker v Secretary Of State For Environment, Transport & Regions [2001] EWHC Admin 585 (26th January, 2001)

Baker v Secretary Of State For Environment, Transport & Regions [2001] EWHC Admin 585 (26th January, 2001)

The Inspector erred in law by concluding that section 171B(2) only applied if the whole building was converted to a dwelling, contrary to the Van Dyck case. The enforcement notice was too wide as it prevented use of any part of the building as a dwelling, even if part had acquired lawful use. The matter must be...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2001] EWHC Admin 585
Parties
Appellant: Appellants (Mr and Mrs Baker); First Defendant: Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions; Second Defendant: North Wiltshire District Council
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Procedural Posture
Appeal Under Section 289 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 / High Court Judgment on Appeal From Inspector's Decision
Outcome
Appeal upheld; matter remitted to the Secretary of State.
Legal Topics
Enforcement Notice, Change of Use, Time Limits for Enforcement, Lawful Use, Remittal to Secretary of State
Planning Law Administrative Law Enforcement Notice Change of Use Time Limits for Enforcement Lawful Use Remittal to Secretary of State

Source-derived case record

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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Appellants (Mr and Mrs Baker)

Appellant

Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions

First Defendant

North Wiltshire District Council

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Appeal Under Section 289 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 / High Court Judgment on Appeal From Inspector's Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the enforcement notice was too wide in prohibiting any residential use of the building
  2. 2 Whether part of the building had acquired lawful use as a dwelling by passage of time under section 171B(2) of the 1990 Act
  3. 3 Whether the Inspector misunderstood or misapplied the law regarding use of part of a building as a dwelling

Ratio Decidendi

The Inspector erred in law by concluding that section 171B(2) only applied if the whole building was converted to a dwelling, contrary to the Van Dyck case. The enforcement notice was too wide as it prevented use of any part of the building as a dwelling, even if part had acquired lawful use. The matter must be remitted to the Secretary of State for reconsideration.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; matter remitted to the Secretary of State.

Orders

  • Decision of the Inspector quashed and remitted to the Secretary of State for reconsideration.
  • Order for costs in the sum of £10,000 inclusive of VAT in favour of the Appellants.