The following information has been added to the "Part 1 of the GPDO – Larger Rear Extensions – Guide" document:
- A Court of Appeal decision that highlights the risks for an LPA if it decides that a notification is "invalid" (i.e. if the LPA decides that the submitted information is insufficient).
- An appeal decision that indicates that even if the decision notice doesn’t refer to a condition within the legislation, the development would still need to comply with this condition.
- An appeal decision that indicates that it would not be possible for an LPA to issue an LDC (proposed) unless the application for the LDC was received by the LPA after the latter has issued a decision (or failed to issue a decision within the time period) for the notification and prior approval process.
- A Court of Appeal decision that indicates that where the LPA fails to issue a decision within the time period, then even if this breaches the Convention rights of a third party (e.g. an objector, etc), it would not affect the validity of the planning permission obtained by the developer. However, as indicated by this decision, it could leave the LPA open to a claim before the Ombudsman for maladministration or a claim for damages under Section 8 of the Human Rights Act.