Cases - Riordan Communications Ltd v South Buckinghamshire District Council

Record details

Name
Riordan Communications Ltd v South Buckinghamshire District Council
Date
[2000]
Citation
1 PLR 45
Legislation
Keywords
Planning control
Summary

Building work was delayed because of the owner's financial difficulties, but a few days before the time limit expired, some demolition and foundation work was undertaken to avoid the lapse of permission. The local planning authority claimed that the permission had lapsed because at the time of the initial work the developer had no genuine intention to carry out the development.

The judge held, following the East Dunbartonshire Council case, that there is nothing in the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to indicate the requirement of an intention. It is simply a question of fact and degree whether the works were done in accordance with the permission and whether they were material in the sense of not being de minimis (trifling).