Claimant living in caravan — Travelling away for work in second caravan — Inspector concluding claimant not a gypsy for purposes of granting planning permission — Application under section 288 Town and Country Planning Act 1990 — Application dismissed
The claimant owned two mobile homes. He housed his family in one, which was permanently located on a site, and used the other to travel around the country in search of work. In 2001, the second defendant council refused the claimant’s application for planning permission to retain the first mobile home and outbuildings for residential use on the site. An inspector dismissed the claimant’s appeal, on the ground, inter alia, that he had failed to satisfy the definition of a gypsy, as provided by section 24(8) of the Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960, and considered in R v South Hams District Council, ex parte Gibb [1995] QB 158. The claimant applied under section 288 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to have the inspector’s decision quashed, on the basis that the inspector had failed to take into account the appropriate guidelines and plans regarding the provision of gypsy sites.
Held: The application failed.
The inspector had taken into account the relevant statutory provisions and case law when considering the claimant’s gypsy status. He was entitled to conclude that the claimant’s lifestyle was akin to that of a subcontractor travelling from his permanent home to his employment by way of a caravan, rather than that of a true nomadic traveller.
David Watkinson (instructed by the Community Law Partnership, of Birmingham) represented the claimant; Timothy Mould (instructed by the Treasury solicitor) represented the first defendant; The second defendant did not appear and was not represented.
Vivienne Lane, barrister
