Local Government Lawyer Home Page


Sharpe Edge Webpage Banner

Welcome to Sharpe Edge, Sharpe Pritchard’s local government legal hub on Local Government Lawyer.

Sharpe Edge features news, views and analysis from our team of specialist local government lawyers working at the heart of the latest legal developments. Sharpe Edge platform is also the only place where local government lawyers can get e-access to two law books by our Head of Local Government Rob Hann: The Guide to Local Authority Charging and Trading Powers (‘LACAT’) and The Guide to Local Authority Companies and Partnerships (‘LACAP’).

 

                                                                                                  

Slide background

Time after time: extending time for determination of a prior approval application

Icons DateRachel Lee and Christos Paphiti examine the time period for determination of Prior Approval (‘PA’) applications and explore how a local authority can extend the time period for determination.

The basics of PA applications

Certain types of development are deemed to have planning permission without the need to submit a planning application for planning permission – this is known as ‘permitted development’. The relevant legislation is the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (‘GPDO 2015’).

For certain types of permitted development, there is a requirement on the developer to submit an application to the local planning authority for its prior approval (‘PA’) or for a determination as to whether PA is required.

The Government is pressing ahead with their build agenda and the trend to increase, and expand upon, the categories of permitted development rights shows no signs of slowing. For example, the new class E business to residential class permitted development right is being introduced from August 2021.

Time period for determination

The local planning authority must make a decision on a PA application within the relevant time period specified in Schedule 2 to GPDO 2015 and an applicant should not commence the development until the local planning authority has issued its determination.

A local planning authority has to be very aware of the time periods for determining PAs and should ensure that PA applications are dealt with efficiently and promptly and that the 8 week deadline is calculated correctly. A development could be ‘deemed approved’ if the time period for determination expires and no decision notice has been issued.

If the time period expires without a determination, the local planning authority may lose the opportunity to refuse a proposal that fails to meet the conditions set out under the relevant class of permitted development and/or fail to ensure that the permitted development proceeds with appropriate conditions, for example, ensuring permanent provision of refuse, recycling and cycle facilities. It is crucial that the local planning authority correctly calculates the deadline for determining an application; a key point is that the 8 weeks includes the date on which a valid application is received.

By default, this time period is an 8-week period from when the application is received, but this can vary depending on the type of proposal. Article 7 of GDPO 2015 says that the time period for determination will be:

  1. within the period specified in Schedule 2 (see below),
  2. where no period is specified, within a period of 8 weeks beginning with the day immediately following that on which the application is received by the authority, or
  3. within such longer period as may be agreed by the applicant and the authority in writing.

Two examples where Schedule 2 to GDPO 2015 sets out a time limit are Class A changes (from restaurants, cafes, takeaways, or pubs changing to retail) and Class T (from business, hotel etc. to state-funded schools or registered nursery). The period is 8 weeks for both.

Extending the time period for determination

The time period for determination can be extended if the parties are in agreement: Article 7(c) of GDPO 2015.

The case of Gluck v Secretary of State for Housing Communities and Local Government [2020] EWHC 161 Admin concerned Class O permitted development rights which allow a change of use from offices to residential accommodation. In that case, the judge determined that:

“Article 7 must be read as if limb (c) is an alternative to both limbs (a) and (b). The consequence is that any of the prior approval time periods specified either in Schedule 2 or in Article 7 is capable of being extended by an agreement by the applicant and the LPA in writing.” (Para 85).

The judge ruled (at paragraph 102 of his judgment) that “I do not think that limb (c) necessarily insists upon an agreement being expressed by both parties in writing…it is sufficient that a verbal agreement was made by both parties which was then appropriately evidenced in writing”.

Therefore, local planning authorities can rely on Article 7(c) of GDPO 2015 when dealing with a PA application if they need more time to deal with the matter. As a matter of good practice, and to avoid disputes, it will be important to have evidence of any time extension properly documented between the applicant and the local planning authority. A local planning authority will need a clear indication of agreement by the applicant to extend the time frame.

It could be argued that processing these PA applications is not necessarily an easy or quick task, nor should it be. The number of PA applications is likely to rise, not necessarily matched by resources (or income from PD application fees). As the permitted development regime expands and the list of PA considerations for the various types of permitted development increases (for example, the recent introduction last month of minimum space standards for new permitted development homes) the ability to extend the determination time frame and the interpretation in Gluck of Article 7 of the GPDO 2015 may prove an essential tool for local authorities.

Rachel Lee is a Senior Associate at Sharpe Pritchard and Christos Paphiti is a Trainee Solicitor at Sharpe Pritchard. Rachel can be contacted This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. or by telephone at 020 7405 4600. Christos can also be contacted This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. or by telephone at 020 7405 4600.


For further insight and resources on local government legal issues from Sharpe Pritchard, please visit the SharpeEdge page by clicking on the banner below.

sharpe edge 600x100

This article is for general awareness only and does not constitute legal or professional advice. The law may have changed since this page was first published. If you would like further advice and assistance in relation to any issue raised in this article, please contact us by telephone or email This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

LACAT BookFREE download!

A Guide to Local Authority Charging and Trading Powers

Written and edited by Sharpe Pritchard’s Head of Local Government, Rob Hann,

A Guide to Local Authority Charging and Trading Powers covers:

• Updated charging powers compendium          • Commercial trading options

• Teckal ‘public to public’                                    • Localism Act

FREE DOWNLOAD

LACAT BookAvailable to buy:

A Guide to Local Authority Companies and Partnerships

An invaluable, comprehensive toolkit for lawyers, law firms and others advising
on or participating in Local Authority Companies and Partnerships”

- Local Authority Chief Executive

BUY NOW

  More Articles

<a href=

Levelling up – A new opportunity for further devolution in England?

Rob Hann explores the Government's 'levelling up' policy and looks at whether it is an opportunity for further devolution in England.
<a href=

Time limits for commencing proceedings in procurement challenges

Colin Ricciardiello discusses a landmark procurement challenge judgment on the time limit for commencing proceedings.
Icons Hazard

The Revised National Planning Policy Framework: Better design, greener outcomes?

Alastair Lewis and Sarah Wertheim outline the latest National Planning Policy Framework changes and explain how future developments will be impacted by the new rules.
<a href=

Loose talk costs money: Oral agreement to forego liquidated damages was valid

Michael Comba outlines and analyses a contract dispute resolution: Mansion Place Ltd v Fox Industrial Services Ltd [2021] EWHC 2972 (TCC)
<a href=

Procurement reform – an update

Radhika Devesher and Natasha Barlow provide a summary of the proposed and enacted changes to the UK procurement regime post-Brexit.
Icons Court

The Public Procurement Review Service Report: Procurement Pitfalls and How to Avoid Them

Juli Lau and Beth Edwards examine some of the most common procurement pitfalls and provide a checklist of points for local authorities to bear in mind in order to avoid costly errors.
<a href=

JCT Dispute Adjudication Board Rules: a case of “three’s a crowd”?

Peter Jansen who specialises in construction law and dispute resolution, examines the roles and functions of the JCT’s Dispute Adjudication Board and highlights some key considerations for parties planning to adopt the Rules in their JCT contracts.
<a href=

The Electric Vehicle Revolution or…

Emily Knowles discusses new legislation on the requirement of electric vehicle charging points, and its potential impact on the Electric Vehicle Revolution.
<a href=

Consultation on the Electronic Communications Code – What’s Changing?

Lillee Reid-Hunt outlines the legislative changes to the Electronic Communications Code.
Icons Court

You Must Adjudicate First NEC3 imposes obligation to adjudicate first before commencing court proceedings.

Michael Comba discusses NEC3 imposing an obligation to adjudicate first before commencing court proceedings.
Icons Court

Rocking aground the Christmas tree

Clare Mendelle and George Dale discuss and solve a common construction scenario, looking at the position under the Contract, and how the Employer should deal with the Contractor's request.
Icons Hazard

Adequacy Decision Granted to the UK

Charlotte Smith considers two recent adequacy decisions and explains how this affects existing data practices.
<a href=

Managing employees with long COVID and employees who have anxiety about returning to the office

Julie Bann and Victoria Smith consider how Long Covid may be treated under existing employment laws and provide compliance guidance for employers.
<a href=

Environment Act 2021: What Does it Mean for Waste Authorities?

Sally Stock, Juli Lau, Ellen Painter and Beth Edwards discuss notable changes made to the Environment Bill 2021-2022, which received Royal Assent on the 9th November.
<a href=

ESG and its relevance to the public sector

Peter Collins and Sydney Chandler discuss the growing importance of Environmental, Social, and Governance criteria in public procurement.
<a href=

JCT 101: Time and Punishment

Rachel Murray-Smith, Clare Mendelle and Laura Campbell discuss a common Construction scenario regarding the Practical Completion of a project, and the position under the unamended JCT DB 2016.
Icons Court

The importance of due process, communication and fairness in employee conduct investigations – what you need to know.

Julie Bann and James Hughes discuss the importance of fairness in employee conduct investigations, taking a look at the London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham -v- Mr S Keable case.
<a href=

Becoming More Inclusive: VAT and Public Procurement

Juli Lau, Natasha Barlow and Beth Edwards examine the recently published Public Procurement Regulations 2021, focussing upon amendments to the thresholds within various procurement regimes.
<a href=

The LADs are Alright

Laura Campbell discusses liquidated damages in construction contracts, focussing upon the long-running Triple Point saga which ended in the Supreme Court this year.
<a href=

Procurement Policy Note 08/21

Juli Lau and Beth Edwards outline Procurement Policy Note 08/21, recently published by the Cabinet office.
Icons Court

Hard Times: Improving Air Quality with Clean Air Zones

Rob Hann and James Goldthorpe examine the introduction of Clean Air Zones to improve air quality across the UK.
<a href=

Autumn Budget Spending Review 2021 – What Public Bodies Need To Know

Rob Hann and James Hughes examine the Autumn Budget Spending Review 2021, looking at what Public Bodies need to know.
<a href=

Net Zero – What’s new for local authorities?

Steve Gummer and Sophie Drysdale look at two major climate publications: the Heat and Buildings Strategy and the Net Zero Strategy.
Icons Hazard

Jumping to conclusions: Final Statements, liquidated damages and material breaches of natural justice

Michael Comba looks at a recent Technology and Construction Court case that provides useful guidance on the JCT’s procedural requirements on disputing Final Statements.
Icons Court

Three times one equals one: Several disputed payment applications amount to a single dispute

Michael Comba considers a case in which the High Court dismissed an employer’s argument that an adjudicator lacked jurisdiction because the referral concerned three separate payment applications and, therefore, comprised three separate disputes.
<a href=

Warm feelings or hot air: the Heat and Buildings Strategy and Heat Networks

This week the government published its Heat and Buildings Strategy (Strategy). This contained vital innovations and essential step changes in terms of how heating is provided, writes Steve Gummer.
<a href=

Procurement reforms: update from Cabinet Office

Rob Hann, Nicola Sumner and Juli Lau assess the Cabinet Office's update on the progress of the government's public procurement reforms.
Icons Court

Bond, Performance Bond. Delivering value for the Public Sector?

Justin Mendelle examines whether public sector clients achieve value for money from the provision of performance bonds.
Icons Hazard

Not so personal messages: R. (on the application of Good Law Project Ltd) v Secretary of State for Health and Social Care and Abingdon Health Plc [2021] EWHC 2595 (TCC)

Nicola Sumner, Juli Lau and Beth Edwards look at The Good Law Project's challenge of the direct award by the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care of three contracts for the production and supply of rapid Covid-19 antibody tests (the “Contracts”).
<a href=

Insolvency – Termination and Beyond

Rachel Murray-Smith and Clare Mendelle consider the potential warning signs of, and the compliant manner for dealing with, contractor insolvency.
Icons Court

Settlement agreements – waiving Personal Injury claims

In the case of Farnham-Oliver v RM Educational Resources LTD, the Queen’s Bench Division of the High Court allowed a Personal Injury claim (“PI claim”) to be pursued by an employee against his former employer despite the parties signing a Settlement Agreement in respect of an Employment Tribunal claim on the same issue. Julie Bann and James Hughes report.
Icons Hazard

Mandatory Vaccination for Care Home Workers in England – Update

Rachel Murray-Smith and Francesca Gallagher look at the detail of the government's guidance on compulsory vaccination for care staff.
<a href=

Make your mind up! Liquidated Damages clause upheld despite Employer’s challenge

In the recent case of Eco World Ballymore (EWB) v Dobler[1] , an Employer took the unusual position of challenging their own entitlement to liquidated damages (LDs) on the ground that the LDs provision constituted an unenforceable penalty clause. Clare Mendelle and James Goldthorpe investigate.
<a href=

Are Collateral Warranties Construction Contracts? Timing is Key.

Clare Mendelle and Anna Sidebottom examine the recently decided case of Toppan v Simply[1], which has provided guidance on when collateral warranties may be considered “construction contracts” under the Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996 and so give the warranty holder the right to adjudicate.
Icons Court

Climate emergency or climate catastrophe?

Rob Hann asks how central & local government departments and councils can work together more effectively to combat the challenges to achieve net zero by 2050.
Slide background