The Court of Appeal has clarified the scope of the Murfitt principle, in a case concerning a bungalow, known as the Goose House, built without planning consent
In Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities v Caldwell and another company [2024] EWCA Civ 467, a Buckinghamshire Council planning inspector had ordered demolition since the construction involved an ‘unauthorised material change of use’ of the land. The owner appealed on the grounds the bungalow was more than four years old so qualified for immunity under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
Sir Keith Lindblom, giving the lead judgment, upheld the High Court’s ruling that the order be quashed. ‘In my view the judge’s reasoning was sound,’ he said.
‘She understood the principle in Murfitt, and its limits. Her observation… that the legislation and the relevant authorities indicate a “limitation on the power described in [Murfitt], where the operational development is itself the source of or fundamental to the change of use” captured the essential point.’
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=b21f1aaf_1)
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=754d0e82_1)
