Fidler v First Secretary of State Reigate & Anor

Fidler v First Secretary of State Reigate & Anor

The Inspector was entitled to find a material change in the character of the use of the site during the ten-year period, particularly after major changes to units 9 and 10. Deemed planning permission under section 173(11) only applies to activities specified in the enforcement notice, not to unspecified uses. The requirements of the notice were not excessive, and the appellant failed to propose acceptable limits on activities.

Parties
Appellant: Robert Fidler; First Respondent: First Secretary of State; Second Respondent: Reigate and Banstead Borough Council
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
12 October 2004
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; Judge's order confirmed; matter remitted for reconsideration.
Legal Topics
Enforcement Notice, Material Change of Use, Deemed Planning Permission, Mixed Use, Use Classes Order, Grounds of Appeal
Planning Law Administrative Law Enforcement Notice Material Change of Use Deemed Planning Permission Mixed Use Use Classes Order Grounds of Appeal

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 13 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Robert Fidler

Appellant

First Secretary of State

First Respondent

Reigate and Banstead Borough Council

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there was a material change of use of the site within the relevant ten-year period
  2. 2 Whether deemed planning permission arises from under-enforcement under section 173(11) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990
  3. 3 Whether the requirements of the enforcement notice exceed what is necessary to remedy the breach

Ratio Decidendi

The Inspector was entitled to find a material change in the character of the use of the site during the ten-year period, particularly after major changes to units 9 and 10. Deemed planning permission under section 173(11) only applies to activities specified in the enforcement notice, not to unspecified uses. The requirements of the notice were not excessive, and the appellant failed to propose acceptable limits on activities.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; Judge's order confirmed; matter remitted for reconsideration.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Judge's order confirmed