Sevenoaks District Council v Arber [electronic resource]
Sevenoaks District Council v Arber [electronic resource]
- 2008
[2008] EWHC 708 (Admin), 3 April 2008. Appellant local planning authority served planning notice on the respondent, asserting a breach of planning control through a change of use from agriculture to residential caravan site. Appellant subsequently laid an information against the respondent, charging him with failure to comply under section 179 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. Respondent claimed that he had done all within his power to comply with the act and that he could not move because his children lived in the caravan in question; he had been refused permission to move across his neighbours' land and he was materially incapable of dismantling and re-assembling the domicile elsewhere. Held: Appeal allowed, as the landlord had not done all within his power to comply with the notice served upon him. By ceasing to inhabit the caravan he was capable of complying with the notice to abandon the use of the site as a residential caravan park. Judges ruled that matters of hardship were irrelevant as they fell for consideration at the time that action had originally been taken in respect of the respondent's breach of planning control.
SEVENOAKS DISTRICT COUNCIL V ARBER
TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT 1990
TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT 1990 S174
TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT 1990 S179
KENT COUNTY COUNCIL V BROCKMAN
R V BEARD
R V WOOD
R V CLARKE
WYCOMBE DC V WELLS
HUMAN RIGHTS ACT 1998
CHICHESTER DC V FIRST SECRETARY OF STATE
WELLS V UNITED KINGDOM
England and Wales--1543-
[2008] EWHC 708 (Admin), 3 April 2008. Appellant local planning authority served planning notice on the respondent, asserting a breach of planning control through a change of use from agriculture to residential caravan site. Appellant subsequently laid an information against the respondent, charging him with failure to comply under section 179 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. Respondent claimed that he had done all within his power to comply with the act and that he could not move because his children lived in the caravan in question; he had been refused permission to move across his neighbours' land and he was materially incapable of dismantling and re-assembling the domicile elsewhere. Held: Appeal allowed, as the landlord had not done all within his power to comply with the notice served upon him. By ceasing to inhabit the caravan he was capable of complying with the notice to abandon the use of the site as a residential caravan park. Judges ruled that matters of hardship were irrelevant as they fell for consideration at the time that action had originally been taken in respect of the respondent's breach of planning control.
SEVENOAKS DISTRICT COUNCIL V ARBER
TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT 1990
TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT 1990 S174
TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT 1990 S179
KENT COUNTY COUNCIL V BROCKMAN
R V BEARD
R V WOOD
R V CLARKE
WYCOMBE DC V WELLS
HUMAN RIGHTS ACT 1998
CHICHESTER DC V FIRST SECRETARY OF STATE
WELLS V UNITED KINGDOM
England and Wales--1543-