Henry Boot Homes Ltd v Bassetlaw District Council [2002] EWCA Civ 983
The point in plain English: Site works carried out in breach of conditions which prevent development starting will not normally preserve a planning permission. Informal dealings with the council are a dangerous basis on which to assume those conditions can be ignored.
What happened
An outline permission for a substantial housing scheme was followed by reserved-matters approval subject to several requirements to be satisfied before development commenced. Limited works were undertaken within the implementation period, but the relevant pre-commencement requirements had not all been complied with.
The developer argued that the council’s conduct created a legitimate expectation that the permission would nevertheless be treated as implemented.
What the Court of Appeal decided
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal. The works were not capable of implementing the permission because they had been undertaken contrary to conditions governing commencement. The court was also highly cautious about allowing informal understandings between a developer and planning authority to override the public planning documents on which third parties are entitled to rely.
Why Henry Boot matters
Henry Boot remains an important part of the Whitley line of authorities. It should now be read alongside Hart Aggregates and later cases such as Greyfort, because not every breach carrying the words “before development commences” has identical consequences.
See Planning Geek on extant planning permission and material starts and planning conditions.
Important legal note: Planning Geek is a planning consultancy, not a law firm. This page provides general planning information and is not legal advice. Case law must be read in its factual and legal context and may be affected by later judgments, legislation or policy. Where the original judgment is available, it remains the authoritative source. If the outcome matters to a live case or dispute, take advice from an appropriately qualified planning solicitor or barrister.
Copyright and licensing: Crown copyright and other rights in judgments and source material remain with the relevant rights holders. Where a judgment is reproduced from Find Case Law, it is used under the Open Justice Licence and the source should be acknowledged. Material obtained from other sources is reproduced only where the applicable terms permit it. Planning Geek does not claim copyright in the text of court judgments.