0
The case concerned a planning permission pursuant to section 73 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 in respect of retail premises in Streatham. The dispute between the parties concerned whether the retail use of the premises was restricted by the permission to exclude the sale of food. The decision notice contained the “proposed wording” of the condition following the description of the development but the condition prohibiting the sale of food was not repeated in the section headed “conditions”. The Court of Appeal (as well as the High Court and the Secretary of State on an appeal pursuant to section 194 of the Town and Country Planning Act) held that the retail use of the premises was not restricted. Reversing the decision of the Court of Appeal, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal, holding that the retail use of the premises was restricted so as to exclude the sale of food. The judgment contains important guidance on the interpretation of planning permissions and discussion on the scope of section 73. Matthew Reed QC and Matthew Henderson acted for the appellant, London Borough of Lambeth. Daniel Kolinsky QC and Sasha Blackmore acted for the first respondent, the Secretary of State. Christopher Lockhart Mummery QC and Yaaser Vanderman acted for the third respondent, Nottingham County Council. The judgment can be found here. The press summary can be found here.
