Your browser is no longer supported

For the best possible experience using our website we recommend you upgrade to a newer version or another browser.

Your browser appears to have cookies disabled. For the best experience of this website, please enable cookies in your browser

We'll assume we have your consent to use cookies, for example so you won't need to log in each time you visit our site.
Learn more

COUNCIL WINS HIGH COURT APPROVAL TO CHALLENGE PLANNING BREACH

  • Comment
New Forest DC has won the high court go-ahead to mount a legal challenge to a planning inspector's decision in Marc...
New Forest DC has won the high court go-ahead to mount a legal challenge to a planning inspector's decision in March that the council was not entitled to order a local
resident to demolish his home in New Milton, Hampshire, on the basis that it was erected unlawfully in breach of planning control.
Following a public inquiry, the Inspector held that although Ken Duffy's bungalow at Lakeside, North Drive, Ossemsley had been sited incorrectly in breach of planning control, the
council's insistence on its demolition would be a violation of Mr Duffy's rights under Article 8 of The European Convention on Human Rights.
Setting aside the Council's enforcement notice the inspector said in March: 'I recognise that by upholding the notice in its present form the appellant and his young family will be made
homeless.
'Moreover, at the inquiry the council's planning officer made it clear that there was very little prospect of reasonable alternative accommodation being made available. In this situation it
seems to me there would be a violation of the appellant's human rights under article 8'.
However, in the high court last Thursday, Craig Howell Williams, counsel for the council, argued that in his reasoning when balancing Mr Duffy's right to respect for his home under Article 8
against the public interest and the need to protect the environment, the inspector failed to take into account the fact that Mr Duffy's home had been established unlawfully and that he
had carried out the development at his own risk.
Allowing the council's application to challenge the inspector's decision, Mr Justice Moses said that although he had 'great sympathy' for Mr Duffy, who was in court with his wife
Jackie, the apparent inadequacies in the Inspector's reasoning entitled the council to a judicial review.
STRAND NEWS SERVICE
  • Comment

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment

Please remember that the submission of any material is governed by our Terms and Conditions and by submitting material you confirm your agreement to these Terms and Conditions.

Links may be included in your comments but HTML is not permitted.