APPEAL BY MARTIN GIBB AGAINST THE SCOTTISH MINISTERS [2022] ScotCS CSIH_18 (29 March 2022)

APPEAL BY MARTIN GIBB AGAINST THE SCOTTISH MINISTERS [2022] ScotCS CSIH_18 (29 March 2022)

The reporter was entitled to make findings based on the evidence before him, including preferring the Council's date-stamped photographs over the appellant's, and to conclude that breaches of planning control had occurred. The appellant was given fair notice and an opportunity to respond. The enforcement notice was not time-barred, and the appeal sought to re-argue the merits, which is not within the scope of the court's review under section 239(1) of the 1997 Act.

Citation
[2022] ScotCS CSIH_18
Parties
Appellant: Martin Gibb; Respondents: The Scottish Ministers
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
29 March 2022
Procedural Posture
Appeal Under Section 239 of the Town and Country Planning (scotland) Act 1997 / Decision on Appeal
Outcome
appeal refused
Legal Topics
Enforcement Notice, Change of Use, Planning Permission, Procedural Fairness, Time Bar, Evidentiary Assessment
Administrative Law Planning Law Enforcement Notice Change of Use Planning Permission Procedural Fairness Time Bar Evidentiary Assessment

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 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Martin Gibb

Appellant

The Scottish Ministers

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Appeal Under Section 239 of the Town and Country Planning (scotland) Act 1997 / Decision on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the reporter erred in upholding an enforcement notice regarding alleged breaches of planning control
  2. 2 Whether the reporter failed to consider relevant evidence or considered irrelevant factors
  3. 3 Whether the enforcement notice was time-barred

Ratio Decidendi

The reporter was entitled to make findings based on the evidence before him, including preferring the Council's date-stamped photographs over the appellant's, and to conclude that breaches of planning control had occurred. The appellant was given fair notice and an opportunity to respond. The enforcement notice was not time-barred, and the appeal sought to re-argue the merits, which is not within the scope of the court's review under section 239(1) of the 1997 Act.

Court Disposition

appeal refused