In what circumstances may an enforcement notice issued by a local planning authority against an unlawful change of use require the removal of structures connected with that unlawful use?
In the Court of Appeal case of Hydro v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & Anor  planning control was breached by the making of a material change of use from residential use to mixed use for residential purposes and as an “Adults Private Members’ Club” coupled with the erection of various structures and the laying of hardstanding to create a car park.
Applying the Divisional Court decision in Murfitt v Secretary of State for the Environment (1980) and the first instance decision in Somak Travel Ltd. v Secretary of State for the Environment (1988) the Court of Appeal said:
“…an enforcement notice directed at a breach of planning control by the making of an unauthorized material change of use may lawfully require the land or building in question to be restored to its condition before that change of use took place, by the removal of associated works as well as the cessation of the use itself – provided that the works concerned are integral to or part and parcel of the unauthorized use. It does not apply to works previously undertaken for some other, lawful use of the land in question, and capable of being employed for that or some other lawful use once the unlawful use has ceased. But it can extend to unauthorized changes of use where the associated works, if viewed on their own, would have become immune from enforcement under the four-year rule in section 171B(1) (as in Murfitt) or would be outside the scope of planning control (as in Somak Travel Ltd).”
This blog has been posted out of general interest. It does not replace the need to get bespoke legal advice in individual cases.