In response to the increasing challenge of Coronavirus and in light of rapidly evolving advice, Tozers has taken steps to ensure that we continue to provide you with our usual client service whilst also maintaining the safety of our clients and colleagues. Please see our full update here.

Complete the form below to ask us a question or make an enquiry. We’ll get back to you via phone or email as soon as possible.

Insights

Court of Appeal clarifies extent of permitted development rights for agricultural buildings

Posted on 21st August 2017 in Planning and Licensing

Posted by

Amy Cater

Partner and Solicitor
Court of Appeal clarifies extent of permitted development rights for agricultural buildings

The issue in the recent Court of Appeal case of Mansell v Tonbridge and Malling Borough Council [2017] EWCA Civ 1314 was whether a local planning authority was right to grant planning permission for the conversion of a large barn to residential use on the basis that this was preferable to the applicant carrying out development under permitted development rights. The Council had concluded that if planning permission for the redevelopment was refused there was a real prospect that the applicant would convert the barn to residential use under the provisions of Class Q in the General Permitted Development Order 2015. This was the applicant’s fall-back position. Class Q permits a change of use of an agricultural building to a residential use. One of the conditions for this is that the cumulative floor space of the existing building changing use must not exceed 450 square metres. In this case, the barn exceeded that area, but the Court confirmed that the 450 square metre limit only applies to the part of the building being converted. It said that the restriction is a restriction on the change of use, not on the size of the building. The Court saw no difficulty if the consequence was that this would result in a building partly in use as a dwelling-house and partly still in agricultural use.  The planning authority considered that the development in the application was preferable to the fallback of a more piecemeal form of development that would arise if permitted development rights had been implemented. The Court confirmed that not only was it appropriate for the authority to take into account the fallback under permitted development rights, but it was also necessary to do so as it was a material consideration, and refused to overturn the planning permission.

If you need any advice regarding a matter like this, please do not hesitate to contact our experienced team of planning solicitors.

Company & Industry

Related Insights

Insights

Are the Courts still dealing with disputed Will claims during the Covid-19 crisis?

Posted on 30th March 2020 in Dispute Resolution

The Courts remain in operation and are hearing trials and applications albeit remotely, like most of us! You will still be able to dispute a Will and issue a claim through the Courts but, for the moment, most aspects of the claim will be dealt with electronically.

Posted by

Martin Laver

Partner and Solicitor
Insights

Changes to the Civil Procedure Rules relating to Possession

Posted on 30th March 2020 in Affordable Housing

Further clarification has been given via an update to the Civil Procedure Rules regarding possession proceedings and proceedings “seeking to enforce an order for possession by warrant or writ of possession”. The text, lifted directly from the announcement is below.

Posted by

Sarah Schooling

Associate and Solicitor