Ashford Borough Council vs Homewood and Reidy-Wilde

Background and Parties Involved

The High Court case of Ashford Borough Council versus Mark Homewood and Teresa Reidy-Wilde centred around alleged breaches of planning control on land known as Bonnington Court. The Council, represented by Emmaline Lambert, sought an injunction under s. 187B of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to restrain the defendants from further development without planning permission. The defendants were represented by Alexander Macpherson.

Initial Proceedings and Undertakings

In June 2021, the Council issued a claim for an injunction to prevent alleged unlawful development on the land, which included the placement of a mobile home. The defendants initially gave undertakings to comply with planning regulations, which led to the dismissal of the Council's claim. However, the defendants later sought to be released from these undertakings.

Application for Release from Undertakings

The defendants applied to be released from the undertakings, arguing that the grant of planning permission by an Inspector, albeit temporary, discharged their obligations. They also contended that the Council failed to review the necessity of the undertakings and did not respond to their requests in a timely manner.

Legal Arguments and Court's Analysis

The court examined whether the Inspector's grant of temporary planning permission automatically discharged the undertakings. It was determined that the planning permission did not cover the entire land, thus not fully discharging the undertakings. The court also considered the Council's failure to respond to the defendants' requests and the absence of any breach of the undertakings by the defendants.

Decision and Rationale

The court concluded that the undertakings should be discharged due to the material change in circumstances, including the grant of planning permission and the defendants' compliance with the undertakings. The court highlighted the Council's enforcement powers under the Act as a sufficient means to address any future breaches.

Implications for Planning Law

This case underscores the importance of timely responses by planning authorities and the necessity for undertakings to be reviewed in light of changing circumstances. It also illustrates the balance between enforcement actions and the rights of landowners under planning law.

Learn More

For more information on planning law and enforcement, see BeCivil's guide to UK Housing Law.

Copyright & permissions