KB--2025-001314 - [2025] EWHC 2809 (KB)

This is an application by the Claimant for a final injunction, with both restraining and mandatory elements. The claim relates to land on the north side of Old Forge Lane, Horney Common, Uckfield TN22 3EL (“the Land”).

The Claimant, Wealden District Council, is the Local Planning Authority (“the LPA”).

The Defendants, Mr. Devall and Ms. Watson are the private holders of the Land since 6 February 2024, and it is recorded on the Land Registry that they paid £20,000 for the Land on 19 January 2024.

Subsequent to the purchase the Defendants instructed a Planning Agent to seek pre-application advice in relation to a proposal to establish a residence on the Land. The Senior Planning Officer indicated that it would be unlikely to gain Officer support and concluded that planning permission would be required. He provided details of the process to apply for planning permission.

Ms. Watson attended one hearing during these proceedings, on 25 April 2025. On 9 May 2025, Ms. Watson wrote a letter to the Claimant setting out representations to the Court. There was a telephone call between the Claimant and Ms Watson on 25 September 2025.

Ms. Watson sent a further email to the Claimant on 6 October 2025 where she indicated that she will not attend the final hearing in person due to the pressure and stress caused by the proceedings. Finally, she emailed the Claimant on 20 October requesting that her resistance to a costs application be communicated to the court. It was in reply to an email from the Claimant referring to the hearing on 21 October 2025 and attaching a statement of costs, further to postal delivery. In her response, Ms. Watson referred to the negative impact a costs order would have on her and her family.

The First Defendant has never communicated his position directly to either the Claimant or the court. However, Ms. Watson confirmed at the hearing on 25 April 2025, that she is his partner and that she lives with him along with their children. The email address used by Ms. Watson also contains both Defendants’ names. Time also was given during the proceedings, on the 19^th of May, to ensure that Mr. Devall was informed.

Whilst I will refer primarily to Ms. Watson, I am satisfied that Mr. Devall is fully informed of the proceedings and that Ms. Watson is representing his position, namely resistance to the Claimant’s application. Ms. Watson, put forward his position in representations at the 25 April hearing, namely that he used the barn to store his tree surgery equipment. I am satisfied that Mr. Devall has chosen not to engage personally in the proceedings.