KB-2025-002908 - [2025] EWHC 2937 (KB)

Fecha: 11-Nov-2025

Introduction [1]

II.

The Claimant’s case [2] – [8]

III.

The Bell hotel, its location and current use [9] – [14]

IV.

The proceedings [15] – [19]

The evidence [20] – [27]

VI.

Legal principles [28] – [78]

Development - Material change of use

Enforcing planning control

Section 187B of the 1990 Act

The South Bucks case

The provision of accommodation to asylum seekers

VII.

Factual background [79] – [158]

First period of use as accommodation for asylum seekers

Second period of use as accommodation for asylum seekers

Resumption of use as contingency accommodation

Correspondence regarding the need for planning permission

Events since 8 July 2025

The decision to apply for an injunction

The launch of proceedings and subsequent events

VIII.

Discussion [159] – [296]

Preliminary observations

An actual or apprehended breach of planning control

The Claimant’s decision to apply for an injunction

Whether an injunction is an appropriate remedy – the correct approach

Planning and enforcement history

Environmental harm and urgency

Countervailing factors

Striking the balance – is an injunction a commensurate remedy?

My conclusion

IX.

Declaratory Relief [297] – [300]

Disposal [301]