Appeal 3272390
Public case and site metadata stored from the official casework database, including fields that were empty in the source release.
A clearer next step
See how Inspectors approached issues like yours
Bring your planning decision into a private workspace. We separate the disputed points, then match them with source-located Inspector reasoning from similar appeals.
- See which issues the decision appears to turn on
- Compare the facts and open the full appeal records
One private comparison
How the refusal review worksOne-off service · No subscription
Similar appeals are evidence to inspect, not a prediction of your outcome.
Official decision document
The decision, section by section
6 sections
Read the development description and the Inspector’s text from the official decision PDF in source order. Source headings are retained where available. Personal and contact details are removed by an automated privacy filter; this is source material, not Rules for You analysis.
Section 01
Development description
described as “proposed single storey rear extension would measure 6 meters in depth, by 16 meters in width and have a height of 3.1 metres”.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is dismissed.
Section 03
Procedural Matters
Since the decision on the appeal was quashed by order of the [address], the Council has subsequently granted planning permission1 for extensions to the host dwelling that incorporate a single storey rear extension projecting 6m from its rear elevation.
At the time of my site visit, I saw a single storey rear extension had been constructed up to eaves height. Therefore, the main parties were given an opportunity to comment on this matter in the interests of natural justice and were directed to the judgement in Winters v SSCLG & [name] [2017] EWHC 357 (Admin). The main parties have therefore not been prejudiced.
The appellant has confirmed that the ground floor extension subject to the prior approval application was approved under these planning permissions and that construction is almost complete. I have determined the appeal on this basis.
Section 04
Main Issue
The main issue is whether the proposal is permitted development under the above Order. 1 Planning References 22/01536/FULH, 23/00009/FULH and 23/00562/FULH
Section 05
Reasons
Having regard to the appellant’s additional evidence, prior approval cannot be granted for development that has already begun, whether or not it is wholly or partially completed2. I therefore conclude that the proposed extension is not permitted under Schedule 2, Part 1, Class A of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015.
As the proposal does not constitute permitted development, I have no need to consider the amenity of adjoining premises.
Section 06
Conclusion
For the reasons given above, I conclude that the appeal should be dismissed.
Planning inspector and document dates
The official casework attribution is grouped under a one-way keyed hash and shown only by its local identifier. Decision-letter dates and page references are extracted by fixed first-page rules and checked against that authoritative record.
Appeal Decision
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 6 October 2023Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 20 June 2023 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 3272390
- Application reference
- 20/02068/GPDE
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- Southend-on-Sea City Council
- Planning authority code
- E06000033
Casework details
The casework, procedure, development and linking details supplied by the official record.
- Casework type
- Householder (HAS)
- Procedure
- Written Representations
- Development type
- Householder developments
- Appeal type reason
- 3. Refused prior approval of permitted development rights
- Appeal reason
- Refusal
- Type detail
- Planning Appeals - Full
- Jurisdiction
- Transferred
- Link status
- Not Linked
Site and development
Published appeal-site measurements and planning designations, without the withheld precise location fields.
- Site area
- Not recorded
- Floor space
- 96 m²
- Number of residences
- 0
- Site in Green Belt
- No
- Agricultural holding
- No
- Affects setting of a listed building
- Not recorded
- Historic building grant made
- Not recorded
- Relates to a conservation area
- Not recorded
- Flooding is an issue
- Not recorded
- Site within an AONB
- Not recorded
- Site within an SSSI
- Not recorded
Decision and dates
The published outcome and every imported case date.
- Official decision
- Dismissed
- Decision category
- Dismissed
- Received date
- 1 April 2021
- Valid date
- 1 April 2021
- Start date
- 2 March 2023
- Planning authority decision date
- 11 January 2021
- Appeal decision date
- 6 October 2023
Case administration
Published recovery, call-in, costs and enforcement information for this case.
- Redetermined
- Yes
- Bespoke
- No
- Date recovered
- Not recorded
- Date not recovered or derecovered
- Not recorded
- Call-in date
- Not recorded
- Costs applied for
- No
- Enforcement grounds count
- Not recorded
- Enforcement grounds
- Not recorded
Source and catalogue history
When this record appeared in the rolling official release and when the catalogue stored it.
- Source
- Planning Inspectorate casework database
- Source data system
- Horizon
- Dataset status
- Current release
- Catalogue record ID
- 39819
- First seen
- 20 August 2026 at 14:24
- Last seen
- 20 August 2026 at 16:27
- Removed from release
- Not recorded
- Record created
- 20 August 2026 at 14:24
- Record updated
- 24 August 2026 at 16:21