Keenan v Woking Borough Council & Anor

Keenan v Woking Borough Council & Anor

A local planning authority's failure to respond within 28 days to a prior approval application under the GPDO 1995 does not grant planning permission for development that does not fall within the scope of 'permitted development' as defined by the Order. The conditions and procedural requirements for prior approval only apply to development that is already permitted by the relevant class; they do not extend or create permission for development outside that class.

Parties
Appellant: Patrick Keenan; First Respondent: Woking Borough Council; Second Respondent: Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 June 2017
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Permitted Development, Prior Approval Procedure, Enforcement Notices, Agricultural and Forestry Development, Interpretation of GPDO 1995

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 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Patrick Keenan

Appellant

Woking Borough Council

First Respondent

Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment

  1. 1 Does a local planning authority's failure to respond within 28 days to a prior approval application under the GPDO 1995 grant planning permission for development not otherwise permitted by the Order?
  2. 2 Is planning permission for a development outside the scope of 'permitted development' under the GPDO 1995 deemed to be granted by default if the authority fails to respond within the statutory period?

Ratio Decidendi

A local planning authority's failure to respond within 28 days to a prior approval application under the GPDO 1995 does not grant planning permission for development that does not fall within the scope of 'permitted development' as defined by the Order. The conditions and procedural requirements for prior approval only apply to development that is already permitted by the relevant class; they do not extend or create permission for development outside that class.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed