“Part 1 of the GPDO – GENERAL Appeal Decisions” – 4 additional appeal decisions (total = 1,412) …

The Part 1 of the GPDO - GENERAL Appeal Decisions document has been updated to include 4 additional appeal decisions relating to householder permitted development legislation, for which the conclusions are as follows:

May 2021 - Code a01306 (appeal dismissed):

  • This appeal decision provides an example of where it was concluded that a relatively short width of wall is “a wall forming a side elevation”. (*)
    [Note: The wall is single storey, and has width approx 1.2m].

May 2021 - Code a01305 (appeal dismissed):

  • This appeal decision provides an example of where a condition (on a previous planning permission) removes permitted development rights under a previous version of the GPDO but doesn’t refer to subsequent versions of the GPDO, and the Inspector concluded that the condition does remove permitted development rights under the current version of the GPDO.
    [Quote: “There was no evidence to suggest that the relevant planning permission was not implemented or that the dwelling was erected pursuant to a different permission. A previous version of the GPDO was in force when permission was granted in 2004. However, the Courts have held that conditions removing permitted development rights under the GPDO have a continuing effect in respect of subsequent versions of that legislation [R v Tunbridge Wells BC ex parte Blue Boys Developments Ltd [1990] 1 PLR 55; [1990] JPL 495.]. Therefore, the effect of condition 22 is to restrict development otherwise permitted by the GPDO unless express planning permission is obtained. I acknowledge that the National Planning Policy Framework discourages the use of such conditions unless there is clear justification. However, that refers to considerations in the granting of new planning permissions and so has no bearing on the continuing effect of condition 22. Whilst the appellant may not when acquiring the dwelling have been made aware of the condition, that also has no relevance to its continuing effect. The planning permission granted by the GPDO at Article 3, Schedule 2, Part 1 for certain development within the curtilage of a dwelling includes at Class E provision of a building required for a purpose incidental to the enjoyment of the dwelling as such, subject to certain size and locational limitations. However, that permission is not absolute and is qualified by other statutory provisions. The effect of the provision in the GPDO at Article 3 (4) is that development cannot be permitted by the GPDO where it would be contrary to a condition on a grant of express planning permission. The outbuilding is an ancillary building within the curtilage of the dwelling and so falls squarely within the types of development restricted by condition 22. I was not made aware of planning permission having been granted for erecting the outbuilding following submission of a planning application. As erecting the outbuilding would in consequence be contrary to condition 22 it cannot be permitted by the GPDO Article 3, Schedule 2, Part 1, Class E, even if the relevant size and locational limitations would otherwise be met.”].

May 2021 - Code a01304 (appeal allowed):

  • [Note: To view these conclusions, please log onto the website as a member].

May 2021 - Code a01303 (appeal allowed):

  • [Note: To view these conclusions, please log onto the website as a member].

Notes:

  • To view the conclusions, full summaries, and decision notices for any of the above appeals, please view the Part 1 of the GPDO - GENERAL Appeal Decisions document. As a member of the Planning Jungle website, you can view the decision notices for all of the appeals within the above document for no extra cost.
  • Any of the above conclusions marked with a "(*)" contradict other appeal decisions. The "Reference Section" within the above document indicates how many appeals have supported and contradicted each particular conclusion.