Hydro v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & Anor

The council's enforcement notice was not ultra vires; the inspector lawfully required removal of structures integral to the unauthorized use, applying the Murfitt principle within the statutory scheme. The steps required did not exceed what was necessary to remedy the breach, and the inspector's approach was proportionate and lawful.

Parties: Appellant: Kestrel Hydro; First Respondent: Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government; Second Respondent: Spelthorne Borough Council
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 22 July 2016
Procedural Posture: Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome: Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics: Enforcement Notice, Material Change of Use, Operational Development, Green Belt, Statutory Interpretation, Remedial Provisions, Time Limits for Enforcement

Planning Law Administrative Law Enforcement Notice Material Change of Use Operational Development Green Belt Statutory Interpretation Remedial Provisions +1 more

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 17 Party arguments 2

Parties

Kestrel Hydro

Appellant

Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government

First Respondent

Spelthorne Borough Council

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

1 Whether enforcement action was ultra vires due to operational development being immune after four years
2 Whether inspector erred in considering necessity and proportionality under ground (f) appeal

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed