- Planning enforcement and prosecution (Zafar v Stoke-on-Trent Council)
- What are the practical implications of this case?
- What was the background?
- What did the court decide?
- Case details
Planning analysis: The court in this case had to determine whether in a prosecution for breach of an enforcement notice the council had to prove the existence of an Article 4 Direction removing permitted development rights and, if so, how. It also had to decide whether the absence of proof of an Article 4 Direction as a defence to a breach of an enforcement notice was precluded by section 285(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (TCPA 1990). In dismissing the appeal, the court held that it was not open to the appellant to argue as a defence that the council could not prove the existence of the Article 4 Direction and, in any event, the council had proved the existence of the Article 4 Direction. Written by John Litton QC, barrister, at Landmark Chambers.
Sign in or take a trial to read the full analysis.
To continue reading this news article, as well as thousands of others like it, sign in to LexisPSL or register for a free trial