Limitations on Planning Permissions and Material Changes of Use

Summary

• The established principle that a planning permission can only be limited by a condition is not relevant when considering the lawfulness of a change of use.
• If the change of use is material planning permission is needed.
• Deciding whether a change of use is material is a matter of planning judgment that must be based on a proper interpretation of the use permitted by the planning permission.

 

The I’m Your Man Principle

In the I’m Your Man Limited case it was established that any limitation on the grant of a planning permission is only legally effective if it is secured by a condition. The case concerned a planning permission that was expressed as temporary in the description of development but the court held that, as the change from temporary to permanent use was not in the circumstances a material change of use that would need planning permission, the absence of a condition limiting the duration of the permission meant that the permission allowed permanent use.

I’m Your Man Ltd v Secretary of State for the Environment [1999] 77 P. & C.R. 251

 

The Barton Park Case

Barton Park Estates Ltd owned a caravan site. Planning permission was granted in 1987 permitting “9 residential vans, 16 holiday chalets, 18 static vans and 30 touring units” at the site. Although the permission contained conditions that limited the number of months in each year that the chalets, static caravans and touring caravans could be occupied and which prevented touring caravans from remaining on the site for more than three weeks per year, there was no condition limiting the number of caravans and chalets to the numbers listed in the description of development.

Barton Park sought to argue that they had planning permission for a caravan site, with no limitation on the number of caravans that they could bring onto the site for residential use. The Court of Appeal disagreed.

Barton Park Estates Ltd. v The Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, Dartmoor National Park Authority [2022] EWCA Civ 833

 

Interpreting Planning Permissions

The Court said that a planning permission needs to be read in a straightforward way - giving the words used their ordinary plain English meaning - and that the planning permission must be considered as a whole, with the description of development being read in conjunction with the conditions.

In the circumstances of the case the Court considered that the wording of the description of development and the conditions that had been imposed meant that the planning permission clearly did not prevent an open-ended caravan site use.

The Court did not accept Barton Park’s argument that there was any conflict with the I’m Your Man principle as the key point in that case was that there was no material change of use between what the planning permission permitted and what was proposed so that, in the absence of a condition limiting the use, nothing more was required. The Court distinguished that situation from the one it faced in Barton Park because:

1. the planning permission did not permit an open-ended caravan site use;
2. the appeal inspector conclusion that the proposed change of use would be a material change of use was a reasonable exercise of planning judgment; and
3. planning permission is required for any material change of use.

Barton Park’s appeal was therefore dismissed with the Court explaining that the I’m Your Man principle does not apply where a material change of use is being made.