Judge rejects claim over childcare facilities and permission for "community purposes"

Planning permission given for “community purposes” includes childcare facilities at a public building used by local residents partly for other purposes, the High Court has ruled.

Kelvin Rutledge QC, of the Cornerstone barristers’ chambers, represented the London Borough of Merton in the case over a planning condition that a park pavilion "shall only be used for community purposes ... and for no other purpose (including any other purpose within Classes D1 and D2 [of the schedule to the 1987 Use Classes Order])”,

David Elvin QC, sitting as a deputy High Court judge, ruled this condition was not breached by the use of the pavilion hall for ‘wraparound’ childcare facilities for pupils of an adjoining primary school and as a holiday club for local children.

Ernesto Pinto, chair of the Dundonald Rec Tennis Club, had taken the council to judicial review over the impact the children’s activities had on his club, for example preventing members from playing table tennis during wet weather and impinging in other ways on sports uses.

But applying Trump International Golf Club Scotland Ltd v Scottish Ministers [2016] 1 WLR 85, the judge ruled that “community purposes” should be given its natural and ordinary meaning as including a service benefitting the local community.

The children's clubs were connected to the community, and he accepted Merton’s evidence that they "facilitate a community spirit amongst local families and assist working parents enabling them to remain in the area”.

He said the use classes order excluded only purposes not of a community nature.

Mark Smulian