Court rules Hackney’s prosecution for breach of a planning enforcement notice is an abuse of process

Our client was prosecuted by Hackney council for failing to comply between 2012 and 2025 with a planning enforcement notice issued in 2009. Our client did not appeal against the enforcement notice at the time it was issued.

The enforcement notice required the removal of portacabins at the rear of premises used for religious worship. The portacabins were not removed and in 2010, our client was convicted of failing to comply with the enforcement notice. After his conviction, our client instructed a planning agent to submit documentation and make representations on his behalf to the council arguing that the portacabins were immune from enforcement.

In 2011, the council accepted the force of the submissions and wrote to our client’s planning agent stating that considering the documentation that had been submitted, the enforcement case would “be closed” with “no further action anticipated”. A neighbour who had complained about the portacabins, was written to by the council in similar terms.

Despite the unequivocal assurance given by the council in 2011, on discovering in 2025 that the portacabins had still not been removed, the council began a second prosecution against our client for failing to comply with the enforcement notice.

The magistrates’ court acceded to an abuse of process submission on behalf of our client and stayed the proceedings.

David Sonn was the solicitor with conduct of the case, including the magistrates’ court advocacy. He was assisted by Sophie Drake.