Change of use – planning units – protection of existing rights
K appealed against the inspector’s dismissal of its appeal against the issue of an enforcement notice requiring the cessation of storage and manufacturing activities in buildings formerly used for agricultural purposes. K contended, inter alia, that the inspector’s conclusions were inconsistent in that she had found that the alleged use had been both sporadic, occasional, and yet significant and had failed to take steps to protect existing rights of use. K further contended that confusion existed in the findings that, although the sites were separate planning units, they were used for purposes ancillary to one another.
Held, allowing the appeal, and remitting the matter for reconsideration, that the decision letter, when read as a whole, reflected K’s evidence given at the inquiry but that the inspector had misunderstood and overlooked some of the evidence and had not given adequate reasons for her decision on the principal issues, in particular failing to make explicit which rights were to be protected in the future.
KINNESLEY ENGINEERING LTD v. SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE ENVIRONMENT, TRANSPORT AND THE REGIONS  J.P.L, 1082, Duncan Ousley Q.C, QBD (Admin Ct).
“Current Law” November 2001