Forest of Dean District Council v Wildin [2018] EWHC 2811 (QB) (26 October 2018)

Forest of Dean District Council v Wildin [2018] EWHC 2811 (QB) (26 October 2018)

The building is not permitted development as it has more than one storey; the defendant has persistently failed to comply with the enforcement notice; the adverse impacts on the defendant do not outweigh the public interest in enforcing planning control; granting the injunction is proportionate and justified.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2018] EWHC 2811 (QB)
Parties
Claimant: Forest of Dean District Council; Defendant: Graham Michael Wildin
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
26 October 2018
Procedural Posture
Planning Injunction Application / Judgment on Application for Injunction Under Section 187 B Town and Country Planning Act 1990
Outcome
Injunction granted
Legal Topics
Enforcement Notice, Injunction, Permitted Development, Proportionality, Article 8 ECHR, Personal Hardship, Planning Control
Planning Law Administrative Law Human Rights Enforcement Notice Injunction Permitted Development Proportionality Article 8 ECHR +2 more

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 2 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Forest of Dean District Council

Claimant

Graham Michael Wildin

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Planning Injunction Application / Judgment on Application for Injunction Under Section 187 B Town and Country Planning Act 1990

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an injunction should be granted to enforce compliance with a planning enforcement notice
  2. 2 Whether the building constitutes permitted development under the GPDO
  3. 3 Whether the grant of an injunction is proportionate given the defendant's personal circumstances

Ratio Decidendi

The building is not permitted development as it has more than one storey; the defendant has persistently failed to comply with the enforcement notice; the adverse impacts on the defendant do not outweigh the public interest in enforcing planning control; granting the injunction is proportionate and justified.

Court Disposition

Injunction granted

Orders

  • Defendant required to carry out the works set out in the amended enforcement notice within 18 months
  • Consequential matters to be dealt with by written submissions or further hearing if requested within 14 days