2024 Planning Development Enforcement Quiz

Any action taken to address unauthorized development, ensuring compliance with planning regulations.

A legal process where a court order is issued to stop unauthorized development or to rectify breaches of planning permission.

An administrative process conducted by the planning authority to address unauthorized development.

A court order that compels the discontinuance of unauthorized development and restores the original condition.

A person who has grounds to bring a case to court for enforcement of planning regulations.

The planning authority has the power to decide whether or not to take enforcement action based on factors like resource availability and local impacts.

A notice issued by the planning authority demanding the cessation of unauthorized development and potential restorative measures.

Generally, a time limit of 7 years exists for enforcing unauthorized development. However, exceptions are made for quarries, peat extraction, and contravention of planning conditions.

A preliminary step taken by the EA to address unlawful development. It warns the responsible parties about the potential consequences of their actions, encouraging compliance. It also allows for written submissions to be made within a specific time frame.

A formal instruction issued by the EA to stop an unlawful development or to take corrective action within a set time period. It can be served after a Warning Letter, unless deemed urgent.

A written statement issued by the planning authority that provides guidance or direction on a specific aspect of planning. It's important in the context of Enforcement Notices because it's considered during the decision-making process.

The process undertaken by the EA to gather information, evaluate evidence, and assess the situation before making decisions on matters related to enforcement, including WLs and ENs.

Violation of an enforcement notice can result in legal action, including potential fines or penalties. This emphasizes the importance of compliance with the instructions outlined in an EN.

A legal process where a court can order someone to stop an illegal activity, such as building a structure without planning permission.

This means that any person, even someone without a direct interest in the land, can apply to the High Court to stop an unauthorized development.

A legal presumption that a development is not exempt from planning permission. The accused must prove that the development is exempt or that they had permission.

This means that the defense of having applied for planning permission after the unauthorized work is begun or making a retrospective planning application will not be successful.

The court can order the person to carry out restorative work, including demolition, reconstruction, and alteration of the unauthorized structure.

A planning enforcement tool issued by the Enforcement Authority (EA) that requires the cessation or alteration of unauthorized development.

A defense available to a person accused of failing to comply with an Enforcement Notice if they can demonstrate they took all reasonable steps to comply.

A type of Enforcement Notice that can be issued without a Warning Letter or formal investigation, usually in urgent situations such as the potential demolition of a protected structure.

A time limit of 7 years for initiating legal action against unauthorized development (unless the development is an unauthorized quarry or peat extraction).

Legal proceedings against unauthorized development or non-compliance with an Enforcement Notice.

Penalties for failing to comply with an Enforcement Notice, including fines, imprisonment, and further fines after conviction in subsequent proceedings.

Legal actions taken against companies and individuals who have knowingly permitted unauthorized development or failed to comply with an Enforcement Notice.

A legal mechanism for seeking compensation for damages caused by unauthorized development, including loss of value due to land being used for other purposes.

A court order requiring that unauthorised development be stopped or reversed, and ensuring that the land is restored to its original state or complies with planning permission.

The court has broad discretion to grant a planning injunction, but 'exceptional circumstances' may justify withholding relief. This discretionary power is less prominent when EU law elements, such as environmental assessments, are involved.

Technicality and triviality of the breach, impacts on the applicant and developer, conduct of both parties, public interest considerations, and the planning authority's awareness and attitude are all factors that the court may ponder.

Planning Injunctions are strictly construed, and courts may impose stringent conditions to discourage delay in complying with planning permits or decisions.

The burden of proof shifts to the respondent, who must demonstrate the existence of valid planning permission or prove the development was legally exempted.

The law requires proof of an unauthorised development that is either ongoing or has not been completed.

A court order can be made against an unknown person if court rules allow it, further emphasizing the wide-reaching nature of planning injunction provisions.

A legal process where a judge can order someone to stop or reverse illegal development, even if they already obtained planning permission.

If someone ignores an order to stop illegal development, they can be held in contempt of court and face legal consequences, potentially including having their assets seized.

A court order issued under Section 351 does not prevent the council from taking separate actions to enforce planning rules under a different legal framework (Part 11).

Work necessary to comply with a Section 351 order (planning injunction) or a Part 11 enforcement notice does not require additional planning permission.

In general, the losing party in a court case pays the legal costs of the winning party (loser pays principle). However, judges can decide to not follow this rule in special circumstances (high bar).

A specific framework for determining legal costs in environmental law cases, ensuring that costs are fair and don't prevent people from challenging environmental issues.

In a Section 351 planning injunction case, the court usually orders the losing party (the person who violated the planning rules) to pay the legal costs of the successful party.

The special cost rule applies to legal challenges related to Section 351 injunctions. This rule tries to shift the burden of legal costs to the losing party and make legal challenges more accessible.