ENFORCEMENT - TIME LIMITS AND IMMUNITY 

Following other recent decisions of the courts in respect of planning enforcement, Collins J has provided further clarification as to the effect of the immunity provisions contained in section 171B of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, in R (on the application of Sumner) v Secretary of State and Wycombe District Council [2010] EWHC 372.

The question of law at issue was that of whether an unauthorised ‘use' became immune from enforcement action after 4 years, in circumstances where it had been carried on in a building which was itself unauthorised, but which had acquired immunity as operational development by virtue of section 171B(1).

In rejecting the appellant's submissions in support of this proposition, Collins J confirmed that an unauthorised use of any building was not capable of becoming immune from enforcement action until it had continued for 10 years (section 171B(3)), other than where the use in question comprised a change to use for purposes of a single dwelling house (section 171B(2)). The judge confirmed that the ten year requirement remained applicable, even in circumstances  where the unauthorised use was carried on in purpose-built, unauthorised structure, which had itself acquired immunity after the lesser 4 year period (section 171B(1)). Alexander Booth represented the successful local planning authority in the High Court proceedings.