Chelmsford City Council & Anor v Wayne Mixture
[2024] EWHC 1006 (KB)
Epping Forest District Council v Paul Rudolph Halama
16 October 2023
[2023] EWHC 2906 (KB)
High Court
A homeowner built a bigger extension than allowed. The council tried to make him stop, but he said he couldn't afford to fix it. A judge said he *has* to fix it, giving him six months and ordering him to pay the council's legal bills.
Key Facts
- •Epping Forest District Council sought a planning injunction against Paul Rudolph Halama for unauthorized construction work on his property.
- •Halama, representing himself, had made unauthorized extensions to his home despite previous planning refusals and an enforcement notice.
- •Halama had been granted planning permission for some aspects of the extension in stages over the years.
- •Halama had undertaken to complete the work to comply with the planning permission, but failed to do so due to financial difficulties.
- •The council considered other enforcement options before applying for an injunction.
Legal Principles
Planning permission is required for any development of land.
Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (TCPA), Section 57
A local planning authority can seek an injunction to restrain a breach of planning control, even if other enforcement measures have been or are being used.
TCPA, Section 187B
The court must consider whether an injunction is 'necessary and expedient' and 'commensurate' with the breach.
South Buckinghamshire District Council v Porter [2003] 2 WLR 1547 (HL)
The court's discretion to grant an injunction is not unlimited and should be exercised judicially, taking into account all the circumstances.
South Buckinghamshire District Council v Porter [2003] 2 WLR 1547 (HL)
A defendant claiming inability to comply with an injunction due to lack of means must provide evidence to support the claim.
Wildin v Forest of Dean [2021] EWCA Civ 1610
Outcomes
The injunction was granted.
The court found a long-standing breach of planning control, the council had exhausted other enforcement options, and Halama had not provided sufficient evidence of his inability to comply due to financial constraints.
Halama was given six months to comply with the injunction.
To allow time for Halama to secure the necessary funds.
Halama was ordered to pay the council's costs of £23,969 within 12 months.
The council successfully obtained the injunction.
Similar Cases
Pembrokeshire County Council v Ryan Jack Cole & Anor
[2024] EWHC 2187 (Ch)
Waverley Borough Council v Anthony Martin Gray & Ors
[2023] EWHC 670 (KB)
Maidstone BC v Goliea Brazil & Ors.
[2023] EWHC 965 (KB)
Ian Caldwell & Anor v The Secretary of State for Levelling-Up, Housing and Communities & Anor
[2023] EWHC 2053 (Admin)