Adam (formerly known as Michael Merrill) v Cheshire East Council

Adam (formerly known as Michael Merrill) v Cheshire East Council

The appellant is a person for the purposes of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, is the registered owner of the land, the absence of a red line on the plan did not invalidate the injunction, and the sentence imposed for contempt was proportionate and just. The appeal is dismissed on all grounds.

Parties
Appellant/defendant: Adam (formally known as Michael Merrill); Respondent/claimant: Cheshire East Council
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
15 May 2024
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment on Contempt and Sentencing
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Breach of Planning Injunction, Contempt Proceedings, Sentencing for Contempt, Interpretation of 'person' in Statute, Religious Freedom and Law
Planning Law Civil Procedure Contempt of Court Breach of Planning Injunction Contempt Proceedings Sentencing for Contempt Interpretation of 'person' in Statute Religious Freedom and Law

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

Parties

Adam (formally known as Michael Merrill)

Appellant/defendant

Cheshire East Council

Respondent/claimant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment on Contempt and Sentencing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant is a 'person' for purposes of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990
  2. 2 Whether the appellant is the owner of the land in question
  3. 3 Whether the absence of a red line on the plan annexed to the injunction invalidated the order

Ratio Decidendi

The appellant is a person for the purposes of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, is the registered owner of the land, the absence of a red line on the plan did not invalidate the injunction, and the sentence imposed for contempt was proportionate and just. The appeal is dismissed on all grounds.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Custodial sentence of 12 months suspended for 12 months upheld
  • Appellant to comply with staged requirements for removal of unauthorised development