Planners Quash Subsidiary Activity


A recent case shows how important the wording of a planning consent is. It concerned a quarrying company which was engaged in the extraction of limestone from a quarry in the Peak District.
There was opposition to the quarrying which led to a review of the activity. The original planning permission had been granted many years ago for the ‘winning and working of fluorspar (and other stated minerals, which did not include limestone)…and any other minerals which are won in the course of working these minerals’.
The quarrying of limestone was opposed on the ground that the planning permission allowed the extraction of non-specified minerals only as a subsidiary activity to the winning of fluorspar and the other minerals listed. This argument was successful in the Court of Appeal.
Says <<CONTACT DETAILS>>, “Sometimes, the use of a property can change over time from one which is allowed under the planning consents to one which is not. It is critical that when a change in use is anticipated, the planning consents are considered carefully. This is especially important where the new use requires considerable investment.”

Share this article