Appellant siting caravans inside barn for use as house - whether such action changing use of barn to single dwelling house for purposes of section 171(B) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 - appeal allowed

R (on the application of Lee) v First Secretary of State and another: QBD (Administrative Court) (Judge Rich QC, sitting as a deputy judge of the division): 3 September 2003

The appellant stationed two caravans inside a barn, which he had equipped with kitchen units in order to use it as a house.

He subsequently applied for a lawful development certificate.

The second respondent local authority refused to grant the certificate, a decision that was upheld by an inspector, and issued an enforcement notice.

Under section 171(B)(2) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, no enforcement action could be taken after the expiry of four years from the date of the breach if the use of the building was considered to have been changed to that of a single dwelling house.

The limitation period for any other breach of planning control was ten years.

An issue arose as to whether the enforcement notice came within the limitation period.

This was dependent on whether, at the time of the application, the barn was being used to station the two caravans or as a dwelling house.

The respondent claimed that since the caravans did not form part of the structure of the barn and were not attached to it in any permanent fashion, they did not constitute an integral part of it, and should therefore be excluded from any consideration of the barn existing as a dwelling house.

He maintained that, without the accommodation provided by the caravans, the barn was insufficiently habitable to be described as such.

Robin Green (instructed by Clarke Kiernan, Tonbridge) for the appellant; Sarah-Jane Davies (instructed by the Treasury Solicitor) for the first respondent; the second respondent did not appear and was not represented.

Held: the appeal was allowed.

The fact that the caravans did not form part of the fabric of the building did not mean that their use was not part of the use of the building.

The use of the building was determined by the space enclosed therein.

Therefore, caravans positioned within that space formed part of the use of the building, and their use was material to the question of whether that building was being used as a single dwelling house.

No statutory definition of a dwelling house existed, but Gravesham Borough Council v Secretary of State for the Environment (1982) 47 P&CR 142, provided the most commonly used description - that of a building affording the facilities required for day-to-day private domestic existence.

In the instant case, the barn was being used for residential purposes, and the fixed caravans provided appropriate facilities within the building.

Thus, the overall structure fulfilled the appropriate description.