Mobile Home Case Law 2

111-mobilehome-logcabins

Carter v Secretary of State for the Environment 01 January 1991
Subject: Planning
Keywords: Caravans; Established use; Mobile homes; Planning permission
Where Reported: [1991] J.P.L. 131
Documents: Case Analysis  
Terms in Context:
...CarterSecretary of State for the Environment CARTER V SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE ENVIRONMENT [1991] J.P.L ...
...V SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE ENVIRONMENT01 January 1991 Lionel Read Q.C. Read, Lionel, QC (c)Sweet & Maxwell Limited Planning Caravans Established use Mobile homes Planning permission Caravan established use certificate for residential caravan replaced with mobile home temporary planning permission granted whether inspector had erred in definition of caravan An established use certificate governed the siting of a residential caravan on a small holding. A's replaced the caravan with a mobile home. The local council granted planning permission for five years for this, subject to a s.52 agreement to take ...
...As appealed to the High Court under the Planning Act 1971 s.246 Held, after discussion as to whether the mobile home did or did not constitute a caravan within the Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960 s.29(1) , and whether the assembling and cementing together of the concrete blocks upon which the mobile home stood constituted integral operations to the erection of a building, that the inspector fell into error for two reasons ...
...considered the distinction between operations involved in the moving and cementing of the concrete blocks, and the stationing of the mobile home on those blocks. The matter was sent back to the Secretary of State for redetermination. 20060628150122 20060628150122 20060628150122 20060628150122 20060628150122 20060628150122 20060628150122 20060628150122 20060628150122 20060628150122 20060628150122 20060628150122 20060628150122 20060628150122 20060628150122 Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960 (c.62) s.29(1) Planning Act 1971 s.246 Planning Act 1971 s.52 Caravan - mobile home - definition of development - established use certificate. J.P.L. 1991, Feb, 131-137 Caravans Development Mobile homes Planning permission 1991222036 725...

 

R. (on the application of Green) v First Secretary of State Court of Appeal (Civil Division), 16 December 2005
Subject: Planning
Keywords: Caravans; Caravan sites; Gypsies; Planning control; Planning permission
Where Reported: [2005] EWCA Civ 1727; [2006] J.P.L. 1185; Official Transcript
Documents: Case Analysis  Official Transcript  
Terms in Context:
...R. (on the application of Green)First Secretary of State GREEN V FIRST SECRETARY OF STATE & ORS ...
...United Kingdom16 December 2005 Tuckey, L.J. Tuckey LJ Laws, L.J. Laws LJ Moore-Bick, L.J. (c)Sweet & Maxwell Limited Planning Caravan sites Caravans Gypsies Planning control Planning permission traveller sites planning permission gypsies mobile living accommodation on site planning inspector's duty to determine status of units The appellant gypsy (J) appealed against a decision ([2005] EWHC 691) quashing planning permission for the stationing of caravans granted by an inspector of the secretary of state. J had applied to the local authority for retrospective planning permission for the stationing of caravans or mobile living accommodation on an agricultural site that he and his family occupied as gypsies. The respondent (G), the chairman of ...
...were issued. J appealed to the inspector, who allowed the appeal and granted conditional planning permission for the stationing of mobile living accommodation and ancillary storage on the site. However, her decision was quashed on G's application because she had failed to consider whether two of the units were caravans as defined by the Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960 as amended by the Caravan Sites Act 1968 and the potential impact on the question of gypsy status. J contended that the judge had erred (1) in holding that the question of whether two of the units were caravans within the 1960 Act was material to the question of gypsy status; (2) in his decision that the inspector was wrong to grant planning permission. The fact that a person lived in a caravan was capable of being a relevant factor in determining whether he was a gypsy, but it was not determinative. Held ...
...with a nomadic habit of life. The statutory definition did not specify that a gypsy had to live in a caravan to qualify as having gypsy status. The inspector's finding that J was a gypsy could not be undermined by the ...
...1212; 92 L.G.R. 473; [1994] 29 E.G. 124; [1994] E.G. 58 (C.S.); Times, April 6, 1994; Independent, April 4, 1994Caravan Sites Act 1968 (c.52) Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960 (c.62) Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960 (c.62) Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (c.8) s.288 Jones v Green on behalf of the Friends of Fordwich and District. J.P.L. 2006, Aug, 1185-1196 Caravans Gypsies Planning permission 2008224725 723...

 

Brice v National By-Products Ltd Court of Appeal (Civil Division), 11 February 1983
Subject: Housing
Keywords: Breach of statutory duty; Caravan sites; Licences; Mobile homes
Where Reported: 81 L.G.R. 652; (1983) 46 P. & C.R. 281; (1983) 127 S.J. 241
Documents: Case Analysis  (1983) 46 P. & C.R. 281  
Terms in Context:
...Div)Court of Appeal (Civil Division) UK United Kingdom 11 February 1983 (c)Sweet & Maxwell Limited Housing Breach of statutory duty Caravan sites Licences Mobile homes Mobile homes caravan on site licence possession The Mobile Homes Act 1975 contains no time limit for making an application to the court for the grant of an agreement ...
...respect of which a site licence is in force. In 1968 the local authority granted P planning permission for three caravans for employees to live on their land. By an oral agreement P granted to D, one of their employees, a licence to live on the protected site in his caravan as long as D or D's brother worked for P. D left P's employment in 1974 and his brother in 1980 whereupon the licence terminated. Despite a notice to quit, the caravan remained on the site, though the other two caravans had been removed. The site licence issued under the Caravan Sites and the Control of Development Act 1960 s.3 expired in 1977. P failed to apply for a further ...
...site. On October 16, 1980 D requested P to enter a written agreement in accordance with s.2 of the Mobile Homes Act 1975, but P refused. Thereupon, the defendant applied to the county court under s.4(1)(a) for ...
...1990) 22 H.L.R. 107; (1990) 60 P. & C.R. 72; [1990] 2 E.G.L.R. 185; [1990] 30 E.G. 89; [1990] J.P.L. 657Caravan Sites Act 1968 (c.52) s.3 Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960 (c.62) s.1 Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960 (c.62) s.3 Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960 (c.62) s.3(4) Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960 (c.62) s.3(5) Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960 (c.62) s.9 Caravan Sites and the Control of Development Act 1960 s.3 Mobile Homes Act 1975 (c.49) Mobile Homes Act 1975 (c.49) s.4 Mobile Homes Act 1975 (c.49) s.4(1)(a) Mobile Homes Act 1975 (c.49) s.4(2)(a) Mobile Homes Act 1975 (c.49) s.4(5) Mobile Homes Act 1975 (c.49) s.1 Mobile Homes Act 1975 (c.49) s.1(1) Mobile Homes Act 1975 (c.49) s.1(2) Mobile Homes Act 1975 (c.49) s.2 Mobile Homes Act 1975 (c.49) s.3 Mobile Homes Act 1975 (c.49) s.3(1) Mobile Homes Act 1975 (c.49) s.3(d) Mobile Homes Act 1975 (c.49) s.9 1983032743 723...

 

Hammond v Horsham DC Divisional Court, 26 April 1989
Subject: Planning; Legislation
Keywords: Caravans; Enforcement notices; Mobile homes
Where Reported: 88 L.G.R. 374; (1989) 58 P. & C.R. 410; [1989] C.O.D. 501; (1989) 153 J.P.N. 564; (1989) 153 L.G. Rev. 670; Independent, May 8, 1989
Documents: Case Analysis  (1989) 58 P. & C.R. 410  
Terms in Context:
...HammondHorsham DC HAMMOND V HORSHAM DISTRICT COUNCIL 88 L.G.R. 374 (1989) 58 P. & C.R. 410 [1989] C.O.D ...
...DCHAMMOND V HORSHAM DISTRICT COUNCIL DC Divisional Court UK United Kingdom 26 April 1989 (c)Sweet & Maxwell Limited Planning Legislation Caravans Enforcement notices Mobile homes Enforcement notice use of land as caravan site meaning of "caravan" It is erroneous to assume that the Caravan Sites Act 1968 applies to the Town and Country Planning Act 1971 for enforcement purposes, as there is no definition ...
...that an enforcement notice under the 1971 Act had to be construed on its own wording. H bought a dismantled mobile home which he reassembled on some land he had acquired in Sussex. In its initial design the mobile home had been intended to come within the definition of caravan in s.13 of the 1968 Act, but it now exceeded the prescribed width by 2.4cm. H used the mobile home as a residence for himself and his family contrary to the terms of an enforcement notice. Held, quashing the ...
...incorrect basis. The enforcement notice was to be construed according to its own words, without regard to the definition of "caravan" contained in the 1968 Act. The only live question was whether the mobile home could be regarded as a caravan in the ordinary use of that word. 20060628150217 20060628150217 20060628150217 20060628150217 20060628150217 20060628150217 20060628150217 20060628150217 20060628150217 20060628150217 20060628150217 20060628150217 20060628150217 ...
...357; [1983] J.P.L. 602; (1983) 127 S.J. 748Wyre Forest DC v Secretary of State for the Environment and Allen's Caravans (Estates) [1990] 2 A.C. 357; [1990] 2 W.L.R. 517; [1990] 1 All E.R. 780; (1990) 60 P. & C.R. 195; [1990] 2 P.L.R. 95 Caravan Sites Act 1968 (c.52) Caravan Sites Act 1968 (c.52) s.13 Caravan Sites Act 1968 (c.52) s.13(2)(b) Caravan Sites Act 1960 Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960 (c.62) s.29 Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960 Part I Town and Country Planning Act 1971 Town and Country Planning Act...

 

Howard v Kinvena Homes Ltd Court of Appeal (Civil Division), 14 June 1999
Subject: Contracts
Keywords: Caravan sites; Contract terms; Fees; Mobile homes
Where Reported: (2000) 32 H.L.R. 541; (1999) 96(25) L.S.G. 30
Documents: Case Analysis  (2000) 32 H.L.R. 541  
Terms in Context:
...UKUnited Kingdom 14 June 1999 Simon Brown, L.J. Brown, Simon, LJ Rattee, J. Rattee J (c)Sweet & Maxwell Limited Contracts Caravan sites Contract terms Fees Mobile homes mobile homes pitch fee review relevant factors site owner's income from bottled gas sales Under the terms of the standard pitch agreement, the annual pitch fee for K's mobile home site was subject to a review based on the RPI, expenditure by K for the occupiers' benefit and other ...
...v Weir Associates Ltd(1987) 19 H.L.R. 151; [1987] 1 E.G.L.R. 191; (1987) 281 E.G. 1198; Times, January 21, 1987 Caravan Sites Act 1968 (c.52) Part .1 Caravan Sites Act 1968 (c.52) s.1(2) Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960 (c.62) Part .1 Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960 (c.62) Part IV Mobile Homes (Commissions) Order 1983 (SI 1983 748) Mobile Homes Act 1983 (c.34) s.1(2) Mobile Homes Act 1983 (c.34) s.2 Mobile Homes Act 1983 (c.34) s.4 Mobile Homes Act 1983 (c.34) s.5(1) Mobile Homes Act 1983 (c.34) s.5(1)(a) Mobile Homes Act 1983 Part I Householder pays for gas not purchased. Conv. 1999, Sep/Oct, 374-375 Agreements Caravan sites Fees Mobile homes 1999162097 723...

 

Holmes v Cooper Court of Appeal (Civil Division), 10 June 1985
Subject: Housing; Licensing
Keywords: Caravan sites; Licensing
Where Reported: [1985] 1 W.L.R. 1060; [1985] 3 All E.R. 114; 84 L.G.R. 225; (1985) 50 P. & C.R. 437; (1985) 82 L.S.G. 2741; (1985) 129 S.J. 653
Documents: Case Analysis  [1985] 1 W.L.R. 1060  (1985) 50 P. & C.R. 437  
Terms in Context:
...CA (Civ Div)Court of Appeal (Civil Division) UK United Kingdom Official 10 June 1985 (c)Sweet & Maxwell Limited Housing Licensing Caravan sites Licensing Mobile home caravan site licence travelling showmens' exemption Where one caravan is stationed on land for the purposes of human habitation, a caravan site licence is required, notwithstanding that other caravans stationed on the site fall within the travelling showmens' exemption, so as to make the site a protected site. D stationed her caravan on land owned by P. The land was run by P as a caravan site. P sought possession of the land from D. The trial judge held that D's caravan was stationed on a protected site and dismissed the claim for possession. Certain orders were made against P on D's counterclaim. P appealed. It was argued that a caravan site licence under the Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960 was not required by virtue of the travelling showmens' exemption set out in the Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960Sch.1 para.10. P claimed the exemption applied where the substantial or predominant use of the site was for travelling showmen. Held, dismissing the appeal, that where one caravan was stationed on the site for the purpose of human habitation, a caravan site licence was required. P could only rely upon the travelling showmens' exemption if all the caravans on the site fell within the provisions of the Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960 Sch.1 para.10. As a caravan site licence was required under s.1 of the Act the site was a protected site within the Caravan Sites Act 1968 s.3 20060628150224 20060628150224 20060628150224 20060628150224 20060628150224 20060628150224 20060628150224 20060628150224 20060628150224 20060628150224 20060628150224 20060628150224 20060628150224 20060628150224 20060628150224 ...
...1 P.L.R. 108; [1989] J.P.L. 513; (1989) 153 L.G. Rev. 328; (1989) 86(3) L.S.G. 44; (1989) 133 S.J. 46Caravan Sites Act 1968 (c.52) s.1(2) Caravan Sites Act 1968 (c.52) s.3 Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960 (c.62) Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960 (c.62) s.1 Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960 (c.62) para.10 Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960 Part I Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960 Sch.1 Mobile Homes Act 1983 (c.34) s.1 Mobile Homes Act 1983 (c.34) s.1(1) Mobile Homes Act 1983 (c.34) s.1(2) Caravan site licences, exemptions and statutory protection. L.G. Rev. 1986, 150(5), 69-70 Caravan sites Licences 1985030603 723...

 

Green v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government Queen's Bench Division (Administrative Court), 19 March 2009
Subject: Planning
Keywords: Caravans; Certainty; Planning conditions; Planning permission; Traveller sites
Where Reported: [2009] EWHC 754 (Admin); Official Transcript
Documents: Case Analysis  Official Transcript  
Terms in Context:
...Admin)UKEW England and Wales Official 19 March 2009 Timothy Corner Q.C. Timothy Corner Q.C. Planning Planning permission Planning conditions Caravans Traveller sites Certainty Planning permission Planning conditions Condition permitting stationing of static caravans Certainty of term "static" The applicants, being the local authority and a representative of a local organisation, applied to quash ...
...a decision of the first respondent secretary of state, through a planning inspector, to grant planning permission for a Gypsy caravan site in a rural area.The inspector's decision related to nine appeals. The first appeal was under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 s.78 and concerned an application for planning permission for three caravans to be used as all-year-round dwellings. The remaining appeals concerned enforcement notices relating to the use of the site. The site was divided into three units. The first contained mobile living accommodation and a timber shed. On the second there were three caravans, a timber structure and a "van back store". On the third there were a caravan, a construction formed of two former caravans connected by a central timber structure, a workshop and another van back store. The inspector allowed the s.78 appeal, having concluded that the development would cause no unacceptable harm. He granted planning permission for the siting of three caravans and imposed a number of conditions. Condition 5 provided that no more than eight caravans, including no more than four "static" caravans, should be stationed on the site. The inspector dismissed the appeals relating to the enforcement notices, having concluded that the ...
...for a site.The meaning of "static" in a planning condition permitting the stationing of a limited number of static caravans on a Gypsy caravan site was sufficiently clear. Applications refused. (1) J had made it clear before the relevant inquiry took place that they wished to have the eight caravans that condition 5 would permit. Rather than expanding or enlarging the permission, condition 5 had the effect of regulating and ...
...a term commonly used in the context of Gypsy cases and arose from the fact that Gypsies generally had one caravan in which they lived and one that was more mobile, which they used when they were travelling. The concept of "static caravans", as opposed to "touring caravans", had been in use in government policy documents for many years. Further, the inspector had made clear in his decision ...
...31) L.S.G. 25; (2004) 148 S.J.L.B. 825; [2004] N.P.C. 108; Times, July 2, 2004; Independent, July 6, 2004; Official TranscriptCaravan Sites Act 1968 (c.52) Caravan Sites Act 1968 (c.52) s.13 Caravan Sites Act 1968 (c.52) s.13(2) Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960 (c.62) Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960 (c.62) Part 1 Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960 (c.62) s.29(1) Circular 01/2006 Circular 01/2006 para.15...

 

R. v Rent Officer of Nottingham Registration Area Ex p. Allen Queen's Bench Division, 20 May 1985
Subject: Landlord and tenant
Keywords: Caravans; Fair rent; Landlords powers and duties
Where Reported: (1985) 17 H.L.R. 481; (1986) 52 P. & C.R. 41; [1985] 2 E.G.L.R. 153; (1985) 275 E.G. 251
Documents: Case Analysis  (1985) 17 H.L.R. 481  (1986) 52 P. & C.R. 41  
Terms in Context:
...under section 141, Rent Act 1977 Encyclopedia , pp. 2999/881/167). Facts The applicant was the freehold owner of a caravan site at Ollerton in Nottinghamshire. There were concrete pitches or bases for 38 caravans. Each concrete base was occupied by a single caravan, which was not affixed to the base. The caravans rested on their own wheels, and stabilising stands, which were part of the original manufacture. From time to time, the applicant would remove caravans from their bases, in order to carry out repairs and renovations. The whole disconnection operation could be carried out in approximately five minutes. 482 One caravan, a large vehicle of some 30 feet long, was let to a Mrs. Moore on or about January 23, 1984. The caravan, although fully mobile, was connected to a mains water and electricity supply, and to a sewage pipe. Mrs. Moore was eligible for and ...
...arise when the facts are between these two extremes; it is necessary to have regard to the features of the caravan which may reveal elements of site permanence on the one hand, or immobility on the other, such as whether the wheels are still on the caravan, whether the stabilising struts are of a permanent nature or of a kind ordinarily used by a caravan when moving from site to site, whether there are services attached, and if so whether they are of a fixed nature or readily detachable, whether the caravan is ever moved and if so for what purpose and with what facility;(4) Rent officers should be on their guard against landlords who rent out caravans on an estate, on a permanent or long-term basis, and who seek to avoid the controls of the Rent Act by making superficial arrangements tending to show some mobility in their caravans when the reality is that they are permanently based on the site; if the occupancy is such that it is plainly used by the tenant as his or her permanent home, then there is a greater likelihood of the caravan being permanently in place rather than it being used as a temporary expedient; the feature of mobility is not the sole determining factor, but is perhaps more significant than any other; (5) In the present case, the movement of the caravans from time to time, and the impermanence of the connection of the various services, established that they could not in ...
...submits that there should be an order of certiorari to quash the registration.The applicant owns the freehold of a caravan site at Ollerton in Nottinghamshire. The site is licensed for up to 40 caravans and there are concrete pitches or bases for 38 of them, nearly all of which are used by the applicant himself to support his own caravans. Each concrete base is occupied by a single caravan which is not affixed to the base. The caravans rest on their own wheels and stabilising stands, which are part of the original manufacture. One such caravan, no. 22, was let to a Mrs. Moore, on or about January 23, 1984. There is no evidence before me whether the letting included the concrete base upon which that particular caravan stood. Like the others, this caravan although fully mobile, was connected to a mains water and electricity supply and also to a sewage pipe. All these services are provided for each of the caravans on the site. It is the applicant's case that these services are easily connected. It is his practice from time to time to remove the caravans from their bases for the purpose of carrying out repairs and renovations. He describes his system of moving individual caravans in this way: “I personally go to the caravan. I disconnect the electricity by pulling out two wires from a trip switch located inside the caravan. I disconnect the water by turning off a mains tap and manually unscrewing the hose. The hose is finger tight ...
...rent officer or the county court judge, as the case may be, will have regard to the features of the caravan which may reveal elements of site permanence, on the one hand, or immobility on the other. Are the wheels still on the vehicle? Are the stabilising struts of a permanent nature or of a kind ordinarily used by a caravan when moving from site to site? Are the services attached to the caravan? If so, are they of a fixed nature or readily detachable? Is the caravan ever moved? If so, for what purpose and with what facility? Plainly, rent officers will be on their guard against landlords who rent out caravans on their estate, on a permanent or long-term basis, and who seek to avoid the controls of the Rent Act by making superficial arrangements tending to show some mobility in their caravans when the reality is that they are permanently based on the site. If the occupancy of the caravan is such that it is plainly used by the tenant as his or her permanent home, then there is a greater likelihood of the caravan being permanently in place rather than it being used as a temporary expedient. The present case, on its facts, is ...
...of this vehicle place it on both sides of the line, but overall, in my judgment, the movement of these caravans from time to time, as disclosed by the applicant's affidavit and the impermanence of the connection of the various services, establish that they could not, in reality—although I am only concerned with caravan no. 22—be described as houses.The feature of mobility is not, of course, the sole determining factor in deciding on which side of the line any particular case will...

 

Newbury DC v Secretary of State for the Environment Queen's Bench Division, 1 July 1987
Subject: Planning
Keywords: Alterations; Enforcement notices
Where Reported: (1988) 55 P. & C.R. 100; [1988] J.P.L. 460; [1988] J.P.L. 185; (1988) 152 L.G. Rev. 170; Times, July 2, 1987
Documents: Case Analysis  (1988) 55 P. & C.R. 100  
Terms in Context:
...decision letter of the Inspector] was that the requirements of the Enforcement Notice, in so far as it relates to caravans now reads: “(1) Cease the use of the land for stationing two caravan/mobile home units for the purposes of human habitation; (5) Remove from the land all mobile homes and caravans stationed thereon for the purposes of human habitation.”These amendments are clearly wrong. It must follow from the Inspector's findings of fact that there are established use rights for two caravan/mobile homes to be stationed on the land. As it now stands, the amended requirements of paragaphs (1) and (5) of the Notice appears to prevent the retention even of the two caravans the Inspector accepted were allowed to remain because they were immune from enforcement. In our opinion the Notice should be amended to read as follows: “(1) Cease the use of the land for stationing more than two caravan/mobile home units for the purposes of human habitation; (5) Remove from the land all but two of the mobile homes and caravans stationed thereon for the purposes of human habitation.” We have approached the Newbury District Council who we believe are in ...
...The second point relates to the Inspector's failure to consider the appeal under ground (a) in respect of the two caravans/mobile homes which he found were immune from enforcement under ground (e). In most cases there would be no need for him to do so, but in the case of caravans a successful appeal under ground (e) is not necessarily the end of the story and it is necessary for ground (a) to be considered having regard to the provisions of the Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960 . In order for the two caravans to be kept on the land for the purposes of human habitation, the appellant must apply for, and be granted ...
...that the Inspector found that there was immunity from enforcement action in respect of using the land for two residential caravans and yet in amending the enforcement notice he retained the requirement which read, “remove from the land all mobile homes and caravans 105 stationed thereon for the purpose of human habitation.” This was clearly anomalous when it had already been found that two caravans were immune from enforcement action. The evidence shows that there were four caravans on the site in all. The Secretary of State would therefore propose to amend the requirement on removal so that only two mobile homes or caravans were to be removed. No other amendment to the Inspector's decision is thought to be necessary, but so that no ...
...decision letter was that the paragraph should be amended to read: “Cease the use of the land for stationing two caravans/mobile home units for the purposes of human habitation” and paragraph (5) should be amended to read: “Remove from the land two caravans/mobile home units stationed thereon for the purposes of human habitation.” There was also an amendment to paragraph (7) with which ...
...3 of the enforcement notice should read “Cease the use of the land for the stationing of more than two caravans/mobile home units for the purposes of human habitation.” Moreover, it is also suggested that paragraph (5) of that Schedule should read “Save as aforesaid in paragraph (1) of this Schedule remove all caravans from the land.” Today, Mr. Eyre put before me a draft which is in substantially the same form of words...

 

R. (on the application of Green) v First Secretary of State Queen's Bench Division (Administrative Court), 13 April 2005
Subject: Planning
Keywords: Caravans; Gypsies; Material considerations; Planning permission
Where Reported: [2005] EWHC 691 (Admin); Official Transcript
Documents: Case Analysis  Official Transcript  
Terms in Context:
...2005] EWHC 691 (Admin)UKEW England and Wales Official 13 April 2005 Gibbs, J. Gibbs J (c)Sweet & Maxwell Limited Planning Caravans Gypsies Material considerations Planning permission planning permission gypsies gypsy status consideration of whether static caravans with timber extensions "caravans" within meaning of s.29 Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960 The appellant (G) appealed against a decision of a planning inspector appointed by ...
...respondent (J), a gypsy. J owned a piece of agricultural land on which he and his family lived in three mobile homes. Two of the homes comprised static caravans with timber extensions and the third was made up of two static caravans joined by a timber structure. The local authority had refused to grant retrospective planning permission for the stationing of the mobile homes and had issued enforcement notices against J. On appeal, the planning inspector had granted planning permission for the stationing of three units of mobile living accommodation on the site, having found that despite wishing to establish a permanent base on the land, J and ...
...his family retained their gypsy status. The permission was subject to a condition that no more than three units of mobile living accommodation falling within the definition of a caravan set out in the Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960 s.29 should be stationed on the site. G's primary submission was that the planning inspector had erred in concluding that the units of accommodation on site were caravans for the purposes of the 1960 Act, and in concluding that J had retained his gypsy status. G submitted that the static caravans together with their timber extensions each had to be considered as a whole and could not be regarded as being ...
...a planning inspector considering whether to grant planning permission for the use of land by gypsies for the stationing of mobile living accommodation to make a reasoned determination as to whether the units on a site were caravans or mobile living accommodation as defined by the Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960 s.29.Held, allowing the appeal, that in considering the question of J's ...
...nature and dimensions of the structures on the site. There was at least a sustainable argument that each of the mobile units taken as a whole amounted to a single fixture consisting of a caravan or caravans bolted on to other structures. If each unit was considered as a whole then it was more than arguable