Matthews v Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions Queen’s Bench Division (Administrative
Court), 10 October 2001
Subject: Planning; Human rights; Civil procedure
Keywords: Human rights; Limitations; Mobile homes; Planning permission
Where Reported: [2001] EWHC Admin 815; [2002] 2 P. & C.R. 34; [2002] J.P.L. 716; Official Transcript
Documents: Case Analysis [2002] 2 P. & C.R. 34 Official Transcript
Terms in Context:
…Whether onus on decision-maker to make own enquiries into Convention rightsThe claimant sought planning permission to retain an agricultural worker’s mobile home on land for a temporary period. The application was refused by the local planning authority and the claimant appealed to …
…the Regions, dated January 5, 2001, whereby he dismissed an appeal against the refusal of planning permission to retain an agricultural worker’s mobile home at 559 Monkton Farm. The facts are set out in detail in the judgment of Sullivan J. below. Jonathan Clay …
…dated January 5, 2001, the inspector dismissed the claimant’s appeal against the Council’s refusal of his application to retain an agricultural worker’s mobile home.Section 288(3) of the 1990 Act provides: “An application under this section must be made within six weeks from …
…He then looked at those main issues and in respect of the first main issue concluded that there was no agricultural case for the retention of the mobile home on the site. Paragraph 15 continues as follows: “I turn now to the particular circumstances of the appellant and Monkton Farm. In this regard the main arguments put for permitting the mobile home to remain were: The need to care for and attend to the livestock. The nature of the enterprise is such …
…is as follows: “Whilst I am sympathetic to the appellant’s wish to be allowed to continue to live in the mobile home, PPG7 makes it clear that planning permission for permanent or temporary agricultural dwellings in the countryside should only be granted where there is a clear agricultural justification. That is not the case here, for the reasons I have given, and I am not persuaded that the other factors brought to my attention individually or collectively amount to a sound planning reason for allowing the mobile home to be retained for a further temporary 562 period. To do so would, in my view, clearly conflict with the…
62.
South Cambridgeshire DC v Persons Unknown Court of Appeal (Civil Division), 17 September 2004
Subject: Planning
Keywords: Injunctions; Planning control; Service
Where Reported: [2004] EWCA Civ 1280; [2004] 4 P.L.R. 88; [2005] J.P.L. 680; (2004) 148 S.J.L.B. 1121; [2004] N.P.C. 138; Times, November 11, 2004; Official Transcript
Documents: Case Analysis Official Transcript
Terms in Context:
…Cottenham, which is in the council’s administrative area; or causing or permitting the entry onto that land of any caravans, mobile homes or other forms of mobile accommodation; or using or permitting the use of that land or any of the caravans or mobile homes thereon, on the date of the council’s application on 14 July 2004, for residential or any other non-agricultural purposes (pursuant to section 187B of the Town and County Planning Act 1990 The defendants were described in the original …
…persons other than those listed in the Schedule to the claim form) causing or permitting —Hardcore to be deposited, caravans, mobile homes or other forms of residential accommodation to be stationed, or existing caravans or other mobile homes to be occupied on land at Victoria View, Smithy Fen, Cottenham, Cambridge.” There are, however, furher drafting details to be mastered if the words “residential or any other non-agricultural purpose” have to be accommodated. We will sit again at 2pm to approve the final form of this amendment. The …
…statement plans which show that a number of planning permissions have been granted to travellers to site caravans for residential use on parts of the Smithy Fen land. But he says that authorised gypsy caravan sites to date have been concentrated …
…c)any other evidence With sufficient particularity to enable service to be effected, and the form of the claim form used shall be modified accordingly.” Subparagraph (3) relates to the filing of evidence. “(4) Paragraph (2) is without prejudice to the …
…examples of the way in which in a different context the power to grant relief against persons unknown is being used under the CPR is illustrated by two judgments of Sir Andrew Morritt V-C in Bloomsbury Publishing Plc v News…
63.
Agricultural need (Case Comment)
Citation: P.E.L.B. 1999, Mar, 17-18
Subject: Planning; Agriculture
Keywords: Agricultural land; Mobile homes; Planning permission
Documents: Full Text Article Legal Journals Index Abstract
Terms in Context:
…LJI00002805791168 Case Comment PELB Planning and Environmental Law Bulletin 1999 Mar Agricultural need P.E.L.B. 1999, Mar, 17-18 Planning Agriculture Agricultural land Mobile homes Planning permission Petter v Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions [1999] E.G.C.S. 42 (CA) LJI0000280579 P.E.L.B …
…of Appeal, judgment March 15, 1999The Council refused to renew a temporary planning permission for the retention of a mobile home on agricultural land in West Sussex. At appeal, the Inspector concluded that although the applicants required occupation of the land in order …
…test” in Annex 1 of PPG 7), they did not satisfy the “financial test” in that the profits of their agricultural activity did not exceed the minimum agricultural wage. The applicants applied to the High Court to quash that decision arguing that the Inspector had not had regard …
…the policy in PPG 7. The functional and financial viability tests were intended to identify whether or not the relevant agricultural activity was sustainable and likely to go on in future. Other considerations material to this in the applicants’ case (such to those who are, for example, acting for clients seeking planning permission for the extension of residential gardens into adjacent agricultural land who may wish to argue that having regard, for example, to the ages of the occupiers a temporary or personal planning permission should be granted to avoid what might appear oppressive use of planning powers by local planning authorities…
64.
Mid-Bedfordshire DC v Brown Court of Appeal (Civil Division), 20 December 2004
Subject: Planning; Civil procedure
Keywords: Caravan sites; Green belt; Gypsies; Injunctions; Planning control; Suspension
Where Reported: [2004] EWCA Civ 1709; [2005] 1 W.L.R. 1460; [2005] J.P.L. 1060; (2005) 102(4) L.S.G. 31; Times, January 3, 2005; Independent, January 12, 2005; Official Transcript
Documents: Case Analysis [2005] 1 W.L.R. 1460 Official Transcript
Terms in Context:
…appellant local planning authority appealed against a decision to suspend the operation of an injunction restraining the defendants (B) from using land for residential purposes until the determination of a planning application by B. B had moved caravans and their families on to agricultural land bought by one of them in a green belt area and an area of great landscape value. They did …
…where hard core was being laid down, from causing or permitting entry on to the land of any caravan or mobile home and from using the land for residential purposes. The local authority had sought an injunction under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 s.187B to restrain the use as an unauthorised caravan site on the basis that it was necessary and expedient in the public interest to do so. B had applied for planning permission to use the land as a gypsy residential site. The local authority submitted that the judge had exercised his discretion incorrectly and …
…a reasonable period to enable B to move off the land.Where a gypsy caravan park had been established on agricultural land in a green belt area in breach of planning control and after the local authority had obtained an ex …
…to restrain the occupiers of the land from causing or permitting entry on to the land of any caravan or mobile home, it was not appropriate to suspend operation of a final injunction until determination of a planning application but only for…
…injunction was designed to prevent. The practical effect of suspending the injunction had been to allow B to change the use of the land and to retain the benefit of occupation with caravans for residential purposes in defiance of a court…
65.
Stanley v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government Queen’s Bench Division (Administrative Court), 04 March 2009
Subject: Planning
Keywords: Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty; Gypsies; Mobile homes; Temporary permissions
Where Reported: [2009] EWHC 404 (Admin); Official Transcript
Documents: Case Analysis Official Transcript
Terms in Context:
…StanleySecretary of State for Communities and Local Government LUSHEY STANLEY v (1) SECRETARY OF STATE FOR …
…Division (Administrative Court)[2009] EWHC 404 (Admin) UKEW England and Wales Official 04 March 2009 Silber, J. Silber, J Planning Mobile homes Gypsies Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty Temporary permissions Planning permission Temporary permissions Obligation to consider grant of temporary permission for mobile home for gypsy family Application of Planning for Gypsy and Traveller Caravan Sites Circular (ODPM 01/2006) Regulatory Impact Assessment The …
…decision of an inspector appointed by the first defendant secretary of state, refusing temporary planning permission for the change of use of land from agricultural to allowing the residential stationing of a mobile home for his family. The land was in open countryside within an area of outstanding natural beauty and restrictive national and …
…material considerations, including temporary planning permission, the area could only be adequately safeguarded by refusing S permission to change the use of his land.S submitted that the decision was unlawful and should be quashed because (1) the inspector should have Traveller Caravan Sites Circular (ODPM 01/2006) Regulatory Impact Assessment to consider granting temporary planning permission for stationing a residential mobile home for a Gypsy family in an area of outstanding natural beauty because it had not been possible to anticipate when…
66.
R. (on the application of Dyason) v Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions (No.3) Queen’s Bench Division (Administrative Court), 18 January 2001
Subject: Planning
Keywords: Agricultural land; Development; Material considerations; Planning inspectors
Where Reported: [2001] EWHC Admin 4; [2001] J.P.L. 1109 (Note); Official Transcript
Documents: Case Analysis Official Transcript
Terms in Context:
…and WalesApproved subject to editorial corrections 18 January 2001 Scott Baker, J. Baker, Scott, J (c)Sweet & Maxwell Limited Planning Agricultural land Development Material considerations Planning inspectors planning permission agricultural land errection of barn and mobile home fairness of appeal D, an ostrich farmer, appealed under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 s.288(1) against …
…a planning inspector’s decision to uphold both the refusal to grant planning permission for a two storey barn on his agricultural land and the refusal to permit a mobile home to be used for residential purposes. D contended that the inspector had not conducted the appeal fairly and, in particular, had failed to …
…appealed against the inspector’s decision to uphold the refusal to grant planning permission for a two storey barn on his agricultural land and the refusal to permit a mobile home to be used for residential purposes. D contended that the inspector had not conducted the appeal fairly and, in particular, had failed to …
…The difference in the inspector’s role at a “hearing” and at a “public enquiry”.Farm Law 2002, 72, 11-13 Agricultural land Mobile homes Planning permission Planning policy guidance 2001047356 724…
67.
Chichester DC v First Secretary of State Court of Appeal (Civil Division), 29 September 2004
Subject: Planning; Human rights
Keywords: Gypsies; Planning permission; Planning policy; Right to respect for private and family life
Where Reported: [2004] EWCA Civ 1248; [2005] 1 W.L.R. 279; [2005] 1 F.C.R. 231; [2005] B.L.G.R. 427; [2005] 3 P.L.R. 39; [2005] J.P.L. 1029; (2004) 154 N.L.J. 1498; (2004) 148 S.J.L.B. 1152; [2004] N.P.C. 142; Times, October 14, 2004; Official Transcript
Documents: Case Analysis [2005] 1 W.L.R. 279 Official Transcript
Terms in Context:
…6(1), Sch. 1, Pt I, art 8 The third defendant, a gipsy, established a residential site on his own agricultural land without planning permission. He was joined there by the second and fourth defendants and their families who set up home on the site in mobile homes and caravans. The local planning authority issued enforcement notices requiring that the use of the site for residential purposes cease and the land be returned to pasture. On appeal by the second to …
…Planning Act 1990 , quashing the First Secretary of State’s appointed inspector’s decision to grant planning permission to the applicants for use of land at Clearwater, Ratham Lane, West Ashling, Chichester as a private gipsy site with mobile homes and associated outbuildings. The inspector had also granted planning permission to similar effect to the mobile home owners on three planning applications deemed to have been made by them in accordance with section 177 of the 1990 …
…notification to the council or application for planning permission, they began to lay it out with services for future residential use. Eventually, they moved their mobile homes and caravans onto the site and began to live there. The Yates and Doe families, who had a close association …
…application is the subject of the appeal under section 78. The effect of the enforcement notices is to require the use of the site for residential purposes to cease. The notices necessarily require, therefore, that the appellants seek pitches for their mobile homes elsewhere or cease to occupy mobile homes at all, going into ordinary residential accommodation. By section 70(2) of the 1990 Act, in dealing with an application …
…may be appropriate, provided that care is taken to avoid encroachment on the open countryside and to ensure consistency with agricultural and countryside policies, including those set out in PPG 7 on the protection of the best and most versatile agricultural land. PPG 7 sets out national policy on land use planning in rural areas of England, and is a further thread in the underlying policy fabric. 306 In compliance with…
68.
R. (on the application of Jordan) v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government: appeal against refusal of planning permission (Case Comment)
Citation: J.P.L. 2009, 8, 1010-1033
Subject: Planning; Human rights
Keywords: Green belt; Inappropriate development; Material considerations; Mobile homes; Planning permission; Right to respect for private and family life; Temporary permissions
Documents: Full Text Article Legal Journals Index Abstract
Terms in Context:
…of the BLP sets out the categories of development regarded as appropriate within the green belt. These include development for agriculture and forestry and other uses of land which preserve the openness of the green belt and do not conflict with the purposes of including land …
…belt is given in development plan policies GB1, USP12 and GB7 and in the Government’s PPG2. The stationing of a mobile home for residential purposes, the subject of Notice 1, not connected with agriculture or other appropriate rural uses, is clearly not an appropriate development in the green belt in terms of this policy guidance. Likewise the construction of …
…ground (g) should succeed to the extents specified above.OTHER MATTERS. 34. The Appellant submits that the removal of the mobile home, his only home, and the cessation of the residential use, would interfere with his human rights as protected by Articles 1 and 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (the ECHR). He submits that his right to respect for his private and family life and to own and use his property would be violated by the proposed enforcement action. He says that the enforcement actions against him are not …
…locations.6. I also note that under policy GB7 temporary dwellings are not permitted in the Green Belt except where mobile homes are proposed in connection with agriculture or other uses appropriate in the Green Belt, but that is not the case in this instance. I therefore conclude that the appeal …
…Green Belt. Although Planning Policy Statement 3: Housing (PPS3), which has superseded PPG3 referred to by the appellant, promotes the use of previously-developed land, this does not override the PPG2 policy of protection of the Green Belt from inappropriate development. 12. The appellant argues that he and his wife own the site and the mobile home and that they have no other property or dwelling. Nonetheless, whether or not the appellant had contrary information from an…
69.
South Buckinghamshire DC v Porter (No.1) Court of Appeal (Civil Division), 12 October 2001
Subject: Planning; Environment; Housing; Human rights
Keywords: Breach; Injunctions; Planning control; Proportionality; Right to respect for private and family life
Where Reported: [2001] EWCA Civ 1549; [2002] 1 W.L.R. 1359; [2002] 1 All E.R. 425; [2002] B.L.G.R. 443; [2002] 2 P. & C.R. 16; [2002] 3 P.L.R. 1; [2002] J.P.L. 608; (2001) 98(46) L.S.G. 35; Times, November 9, 2001; Official Transcript
Documents: Case Analysis [2002] 1 W.L.R. 1359 [2002] 2 P. & C.R. 16 Official Transcript
Terms in Context:
…injunction under section 187B of the 1990 Act requiring them together with other defendants and other persons unknown to cease using as a caravan or mobile home site land known as the Pylon Site, Barnet Road, Potters Bar, Hertfordshire, which had been acquired by the first defendant…
…guilty to non-compliance with the enforcement notices and was fined £600. In 1992 planning permission for retention of a mobile home was refused and an appeal to the Secretary of State withdrawn. In 1993 planning permission for change of use from agricultural to mixed use including use as a private gipsy caravan site for five mobile homes was refused and again an appeal to the Secretary of State was withdrawn. Further enforcement notices were served in September …
…1994 the appeal against these was dismissed although the inspector allowed 12 months for compliance. A fourth application for residential use of the site including retention of the mobile home and buildings was refused in November 1997 and in October 1998 the appeal against that refusal was dismissed by the …
…between about August and October 2000. On 21 September 2000 an application was made for planning permission for change of use of the site to residential use for six mobile homes, each measuring 36 feet by 20 feet, and six touring caravans, for use while travelling. It was refused by the local authority on 13 February 2001 and the defendant’s appeal against that refusal …
…of planning permission, the section 187B application was made. On 13 March 2001 Judge Brunning ordered the defendants to cease using the land as a caravan or mobile home site and to remove from it all caravans, mobile homes and vehicles by 5 April 2001. Against that broad factual background I now turn to the court’s injunctive power under…
70.
R. (on the application of Scrivens) v Ashford BC Queen’s Bench Division (Administrative Court), 24 April 2004
Subject: Planning
Where Reported: [2004] EWHC 1371 (Admin); Official Transcript
Documents: Case Analysis Official Transcript
Terms in Context:
…me turn to the merits. There were two applications before the defendant council. One was an application to station a mobile home to accommodate an agricultural worker, and the construction of a farm access roadway. Those applications were in fact to preserve what had already been done; that is to say, the claimant, without planning permission, had constructed the access way and had stationed a mobile home on the site. The second application was for the construction of the barn described as, as indeed it was, an agricultural building. The case put forward on behalf of the claimant was that it was necessary to enable his venture to …
…rural Kent other than at the villages and small rural towns unless: (i) it is demonstrated to be necessary to agriculture …” The policies in relation to mobile homes, or indeed any housing, in rural areas, is somewhat more restrictive. The starting point is the general advice contained in PPG7. Paragraph 14 of Annex I to PPG7 deals with temporary agricultural dwellings and states: “If a new dwelling is essential to support a new farming activity, whether on a newly-created agricultural unit or an established one, it should normally for the first three years be provided by a caravan, a wooden …
…barn requires only that it is established in accordance with policy RS5; that it is demonstrated to be necessary to agriculture. The agriculture in question was undoubtedly the new venture that was proposed. The fact is that all that is needed is for it to be shown, to the satisfaction of the committee, that the agricultural building in question, in this case the barn, is indeed necessary if the agricultural venture proposed is to go ahead, and to go ahead with any possible chance of success. There was evidence before …
…worth noting that a building, albeit a smaller building, for the same purpose, could have been erected, this being an agricultural holding, for the purposes of agriculture, without the need for planning permission. That being so, the committee was not concerned, directly, with financial viability. Of course …
…at the very least to have wondered whether indeed the building was needed or was intended, in due course, for use as an agricultural building. But that was not the position, and indeed, as we know, the building has been constructed, and no doubt…