Killian Garvey secures the dismissal of an appeal brought pursuant to section 174 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 against an enforcement notice served by Birmingham City Council.
The appeal related to whether there had been a material change of use, without planning permission, of a premises to a large house in multiple occupation (sui generis). The appeal lasted for 2 days and involved substantial evidence concerning what the historical use of the premises had been (ie. a ‘Ground C’ appeal) and whether planning permission should be granted for the development in any event (ie. a ‘Ground A’ appeal).
Despite these issues taking the bulk of the inquiry time, the appeal was determined on the issue of whether the Appellant had legal standing to bring the appeal. On the appeal form, the Appellant had claimed that he was the ‘owner’ of the premises. However, through the written and oral evidence, it became clear that this statement was factually incorrect. Indeed, it was determined by the Inspector that the Appellant had failed to discharge the burden of proof that he had legal or equitable standing to bring the appeal.
Consequently, owing to the Appellant having provided misleading information on the appeal form, he was ordered to pay Birmingham City Council’s full costs of the appeal.
To view a copy of the Costs Decision click here
To view a copy of the Appeal Decision click here
Emotional deregulation and the use of anticipatory declarations in the Court of Protection
When is a settlement not full and final? Tomlins and the CCA
© Copyright 2021 Kings Chambers. All rights reserved.
Please click here to view our current guidelines