October 03, 2011
Michael Taggert, a property developer from Co. Derry, has been refused his attempt to overturn a decision of the Planning Appeals Commission not to allow retrospective permission for his log cabin. The cabin itself was glazed with mains water and electricity. It consisted of two floors with the downstairs including a living room, kitchen and store room and an upstairs room taken to be a bedroom. In reaching his decision Mr Justice Treacy said “the commissioner formed the view that although the applicant's building was described as a summer pavilion it was more than simply a garden room or gazebo. It was a substantial and fully fitted two-storey building and was capable of use as a separate dwelling unit and for planning purposes fell to be treated as self-contained accommodation.” Mr Taggert had called for a Judicial Review of the decision claiming that policy had been misapplied, that the building was immune from planning enforcement and that there had been inconsistencies in the decision making. He had also questioned whether its removal was required to comply with enforcement of planning regulations. However Mr Justice Treacy further noted “it is immaterial whether the farm complex and dwelling (at) the end of the lane are in the ownership of the applicant's family. I accept the respondent's contention that the only means by which to remedy the breach, restore the land to the condition it was in beforehand and remedy the injury to amenity was to require the removal of the structure. In a similar vein moving the structure to another location would not remedy the breach. In any event, as the respondent has pointed out, it would not be possible to move the cabin since this would still require planning permission in the new location.”