An inspector found that a condition on the existing dwelling stated that notwithstanding the provisions of the GPDO 1995 the building should not be extended unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority. The appellant argued that this condition was not enforceable as it referred solely to the 1995 GPDO which had been superseded by the 2015 GPDO. In response the inspector found that conditions imposed under the 1995 GPDO were still capable of enforcement through reference to the 2015 GPDO even if their wording had not explicitly made allowance for any subsequent amendments, since S.23(2) of the Interpretation Act 1978 confirmed that sections 16 and 17 of the Interpretation Act applied to statutory instruments made after 1978.
Section 17 specifically provided that where an Act repealed and re-enacts, with or without modification, a previous enactment then, unless the contrary intention appeared, any reference in any other enactment to the enactment so repealed should be construed as a reference to the provision re-enacted. This meant that the existing condition relating to the 1995 GDPO should be construed as if it related to the 2015 GPDO. The proposed development therefore required planning permission and the appeal was dismissed.
Inspector: Louise Crosby; Written representations