Extending Your Home? Do You Need Planning Permission?

22nd August 2016 By Arman Khosravi

Planning rules relating to home extensions are complex but a householder’s victory in a High Court test case is expected to make it significantly easier for some people to enlarge their homes without the need for planning permission.

The man had already built a two-storey extension to his home pursuant to a planning consent granted in 2000. However, he wished to construct a further single-storey extension and applied to the local authority for prior approval. He argued that the extension would be permitted development, not requiring permission.

In refusing to grant approval, the council disagreed and its decision was subsequently upheld by a government planning inspector. The man’s challenge to the latter decision hinged on the meaning of the phrase ‘the enlarged part of the dwelling house’ in the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015.

The Order automatically grants planning consent for many modest home extensions, but does not permit developments that are greater than a certain area or height or where the enlarged part would be more than one storey. The inspector held that the enlarged part was not merely the extension proposed but included the earlier extension. The consequence, he found, was that the proposal was not permitted development as the pre-existing extension had more than one storey.

In upholding the man’s challenge to that decision, the Court held that the inspector had erred in law. On a true interpretation of the Order, the enlarged part of the dwelling included only the proposed new extension. The earlier extension should therefore have been left out of account. It is considered that the Court’s decision may require amendment of government guidance on householder permitted development rights.

Source: Concious

Latest News

Award That Requires Borrowing Made Into Court Order

17th May, 2024 By

Disagreements between separating couples all too often result in litigation that substantially reduces the assets available to them, as was illustrated by a case that recently reached the High Court. At issue was whether awards made by arbitrators in financial remedy proceedings can be made into court orders even if that would require one of the parties to borrow money. The couple had previously had a relationship lasting a few years before resuming their relationship in 2015. They had two children before separating again in 2019. Following their separation, the...

Inheritance Disputes – Costs Risks Can Be Reduced

15th May, 2024 By

Arguments about what someone promised before their death can lead to significant legal costs. However, if faced with a claim against the estate, there may be steps the beneficiaries or executors can take to reduce the risks, as a recent High Court case illustrated. A man had left a farmhouse and agricultural land in Cornwall to his wife, with whom he had also jointly owned a neighbouring area of land. After his death, one of the couple's daughters and her husband claimed that he had told them he wanted them...

Share Rounding Error Does Not Prevent CGT Relief

13th May, 2024 By

There are often very specific rules that must be complied with in order to claim tax reliefs, but if a small mistake arises, the courts may be able to provide assistance. In a recent case, the First-tier Tribunal (FTT) found that an investor was entitled to Entrepreneurs' Relief on the disposal of his shares in a company, despite owning one share fewer than he needed to qualify for it. The investor had agreed to purchase 5 per cent of the shares in the company for £500,000. He wished to own...

Wife Entitled to Maintenance Until Sale of Family Home

10th May, 2024 By

When divorcing couples disagree on how assets should be divided, the courts will seek to arrive at a fair outcome for both parties. In deciding how the proceeds of sale of a former couple's home should be apportioned, the Family Court agreed with the wife that she should receive maintenance payments until the sale took place. The couple had married in 2006. Following a brief separation, they had reconciled for two years before finally separating in 2022. The husband and wife both contended that they should be entitled to about...