Swale Borough Council v First Secretary of State & Anor

Swale Borough Council v First Secretary of State & Anor

The Inspector failed to apply the correct legal test by relying on irrelevant considerations such as abandonment, absence of alternative use, and availability for residential use, rather than focusing on whether there was actual continuous residential use throughout the relevant four-year period. The decision could...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant/claimant: Swale Borough Council; Respondent: First Secretary of State; Respondent: Roger Lee
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 November 2005
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court to Court of Appeal
Outcome
appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Certificate of Lawful Use, Enforcement Notice, Continuity of Residential Use, Abandonment, Burden of Proof
Planning Law Administrative Law Certificate of Lawful Use Enforcement Notice Continuity of Residential Use Abandonment Burden of Proof

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 4 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Swale Borough Council

Appellant/claimant

First Secretary of State

Respondent

Roger Lee

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Inspector applied the correct legal test for continuous residential use over the relevant four-year period under section 191 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990
  2. 2 Whether the Inspector's reasoning was legally adequate and free from irrelevant considerations such as abandonment and absence of alternative use

Ratio Decidendi

The Inspector failed to apply the correct legal test by relying on irrelevant considerations such as abandonment, absence of alternative use, and availability for residential use, rather than focusing on whether there was actual continuous residential use throughout the relevant four-year period. The decision could not stand and must be quashed.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed

Orders

  • Inspector's decision quashed
  • Respondents to pay appellant's costs after detailed assessment