Dr M P Wallington v Secretary of State for Wales and Montgomeryshire District Council [1991] 1 PLR 87
The point in plain English: Calling an activity a hobby does not automatically make it incidental to living in a dwellinghouse. The question is one of fact and degree, judged by the land-use relationship between the activity and the home.
What the Court of Appeal decided
Dr Wallington kept more than forty dogs at her cottage as a non-commercial hobby. The Inspector concluded that the scale and intensity had materially changed the use and that the dog keeping was no longer incidental to the enjoyment of the dwellinghouse as a dwellinghouse.
The Court of Appeal upheld that approach. It stressed a two-stage analysis: first ask whether there has been a material change of use; if there has, ask separately whether section 55(2)(d) takes the activity outside development because it is incidental to the enjoyment of the dwellinghouse as such.
The occupier’s own view is relevant but not decisive. Scale, character, location and the relationship of the activity to ordinary residential use all matter.
Why it still matters
The statutory wording now appears in section 55 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. For the broader fact-and-degree approach, see Planning Geek’s guide to planning units, ancillary and incidental uses.
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.