Davenport v The City of Westminster [2011] EWCA Civ 458 (19 April 2011)

Davenport v The City of Westminster [2011] EWCA Civ 458 (19 April 2011)

The enforcement notice was not a nullity despite referencing a condition that had ceased to operate, because it clearly stated the breach (commercial use) and the remedy (cease non-residential use); any technical defect was correctable and did not cause injustice. The injunction was validly granted to restrain persistent breaches of planning control, and the appellant could not challenge the notice outside the statutory appeal process.

Citation
[2011] EWCA Civ 458
Parties
Appellant: Edward Davenport; Respondents: The Lord Mayor & Citizens of the City of Westminster
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 April 2011
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From Queen's Bench Division
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Enforcement Notice Validity, Planning Permission Conditions, Injunctions in Planning Control, Nullity Vs Invalidity of Notices
Planning Law Administrative Law Enforcement Notice Validity Planning Permission Conditions Injunctions in Planning Control Nullity Vs Invalidity of Notices

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 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Edward Davenport

Appellant

The Lord Mayor & Citizens of the City of Westminster

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From Queen's Bench Division

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the enforcement notice issued by Westminster City Council was a nullity due to reliance on a planning condition that had ceased to operate
  2. 2 Whether the injunction restraining commercial use of 33 Portland Place was validly granted
  3. 3 Whether the appellant could challenge the enforcement notice outside the statutory appeal process

Ratio Decidendi

The enforcement notice was not a nullity despite referencing a condition that had ceased to operate, because it clearly stated the breach (commercial use) and the remedy (cease non-residential use); any technical defect was correctable and did not cause injustice. The injunction was validly granted to restrain persistent breaches of planning control, and the appellant could not challenge the notice outside the statutory appeal process.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Injunction restraining commercial and non-residential use of 33 Portland Place upheld
  • Appellant's challenge to the enforcement notice rejected