[align=left]
Buckinghamshire County Council v Secretary Of State For Environment, Transport & Regions & Anor, Court of Appeal - Administrative Court, August 31, 2000, [2000] EWHC Admin 386














1




IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE CO 4769/99
QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION
(CROWN OFFICE LIST)

Royal Courts of Justice
Strand
London WC2

Thursday, 31st August 2000

B e f o r e:

MR ROBIN PURCHAS QC
(Sitting as a Deputy Judge of the Queen's Bench Division)

- - - - - - -
BUCKINGHAMSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL

-v-

THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE ENVIRONMENT,
TRANSPORT AND THE REGIONS
and
J BROWN

- - - - - - -

(Computer-aided Transcript of the Handed Down
Judgment of Smith Bernal Reporting Limited
190 Fleet Street, London EC4A 2HD
Telephone No: 020-7421 4040 020-7421 4040
Fax No: 020-7831 8838
Official Shorthand Writers to the Court)
- - - - - - -
MR B SEFI and MS K SHERRETT (for judgment) (instructed by Sharpe Pritchard, London WC1V 6HG) appeared on behalf of the Applicant.

MR D ELVIN QC and MR D ABRAHAMS (for judgment) (instructed by The Treasury Solicitors) appeared on behalf of the Respondent.

Judgment
As Approved by the Court
(Crown Copyright)
Mr Robin Purchas QC


In this appeal Buckinghamshire County Council appeals under Section 289 of the Town and Country Planning Act ("the 1990 Act") against a decision by an Inspector appointed by the First Respondent, allowing the appeal of the Second Respondent against an Enforcement Notice issued on the 8th December 1995 in respect of a building at Westhorpe Farm, Little Marlow ("the Building"). The Enforcement Notice was in respect of the change of use of the Building to an engineering workshop. The Second Respondent's appeal was allowed on ground (d), that is the use that commenced more than 10 years prior to the issue of the notice.

Mr Benedict Sefi, who appears for the Appellant, relies upon two main grounds, both of which raise points of general importance:

(1) That the Inspector erred in concluding that the Second Respondent was a competent Appellant for the purposes of Section 174 of the 1990 Act; and
(2) That the Inspector erred in holding that the Second Respondent was not estopped from relying upon ground (d) in support of his appeal pursuant to Section 174.

I will deal with each ground in turn.

COMPETENCY
The Statutory framework
By Section 174 of the 1990 Act:

"(1) A person having an interest in the land to which an enforcement notice relates or a relevant occupier may appeal to the Secretary of State against the notice, whether or not a copy of it has been served on him. ...

(6) In this section "relevant occupier" means a person who

(a) on the date on which the enforcement notice is issued occupies the land to which the notice relates by virtue of a licence; and

(b) continues so to occupy the land when the appeal is brought."


By Section 179:


"(1) Where, at any time after the end of the period for compliance of an enforcement notice, any step required by the notice to be taken has not been taken or any activity required by the notice to cease is being carried on, the person who is then the owner of the land is in breach of the notice. ...

(4) A person who has control of or an interest in the land to which an enforcement notice relates (other than the owner) must not carry on any activity which is required by the notice to cease or cause or permit such an activity to be carried on."
B...
[/align]