Established use — Enforcement notice varied to delete established use — Whether Mansi principle applies to established use — Appeal by local planning authority dismissed
In February 1988 the appellant local planning authority issued an enforcement notice relating to land at Peel View, Drumacre Lane, Longton, Preston, alleging a material change of use. The use from which the land had been changed was a mixed use of residential, forestry/agricultural, general dealing use; the use to which the land was being put was mixed residential, haulage, industrial sales and storage use. The second respondent, William Swires, and others, were required to cease using the land for haulage, industrial sales and storage uses.
The inspector, who heard the appeals against the enforcement notice, varied the notice such that the haulage, industrial sales and storage uses had to cease, save that use for a haulage business with a minor use for trading on the western part of the site was excluded from the notice to the extent that such use was found established by a previous decision of the Secretary of State for the Environment in September 1977. The inspector referred to the principle in Mansi v Elstree Rural District Council (1964) 16 P&CR 153. The appellant local planning authority contended that, in the light of decided cases since 1964, the principle did not apply to established uses but was limited to uses existing prior to July 1 1948.
Held The appeal under section 246 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1971 was dismissed.
The Mansi principle has not been affected by the decisions in LTSS Print and Supply Services Ltd v Hackney London Borough Council [1976] 1 QB 663; Young v Secretary of State for the Environment [1983] 2 AC 662 and Thrasyvoulou v Secretary of State for the Environment [1990] 1 All ER 65. A single judge should not be obliged to cast doubt on a principle first stated 25 years ago, followed consistently and standing unchallenged. The principle is not inconsistent with section 23(9) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1971; the statutory provision is concerned with reverter to a use, whereas the principle is concerned with the continuance of a use since before 1964.
Andrew Gilbart (instructed by the solicitor to South Ribble Borough Council) appeared for the appellants; Nigel Pleming (instructed by the Treasury Solicitor) appeared for the first respondent, the Secretary of State for the Environment; and Stephen Sauvain (instructed by Marland Quigley, of Preston) appeared for the second to fifth respondents; the sixth respondent, Mr Blackburn, did not appear and was not represented.
