Hannan v Newham London Borough Council [2014] EWHC 1424 (Admin)

An enforcement notice prohibited use of premises for banqueting. Later, in February 2012, a CLEUD was sought.  This was granted in relation to an A3 use.  The local planning authority contended that the use taking place between September 2012 and June 2013 was a banqueting use and therefore involved a breach of the enforcement notice.  The defendant contended that the use taking place between these dates was the same as the use taking place on the CLEUD application date (and was, on a proper construction of the Use Classes Order, an A3 use).  The defendant was convicted in the Magistrates Court.  On a case stated he argued that the CLEUD had the effect of rendering lawful whatever use was taking place in February 2012.  Ouseley J disagreed, holding that, on a CLEUD application, the local planning authority was concerned with the lawfulness of the use described in the application.  In this case the effect of the certificate was merely to confirm the lawfulness of an A3 use – whether or not this was the use taking place at the time of the CLEUD application. It is difficult to understand how such a certificate is in fact a CLEUD rather than a CLOPUD. Richard Langham appeared for the defendant.