VCONST14150 - Dwellings - an explanation of terms: what 바카라 사이트˜designed as a dwelling or number of dwellings바카라 사이트™ means: defending our interpretation of Note 2(c)
Our interpretation of Note 2(c) (VCONST14140) was supported in the decision in Paul Henry Wiseman (VTD 17374), and later in Gill Cartagena (VTD 19454), Martin James Gilbin (VTD 20352) and Michael John Bracegirdle (VTD 20889) .
In Martin James Gilbin (VTD 20352), the wording of Note 2 (c) was analysed in the following terms:
It seems clear to us that condition (c) is satisfied only if there is both no prohibition on separate disposal and no prohibition on separate use. Effectively, it encompasses two conditions. If it had read 바카라 사이트˜separate use, and disposal 바카라 사이트¦.is not prohibited바카라 사이트™ then if one activity but not the other were prohibited, the condition would be satisfied, but the use of 바카라 사이트˜or바카라 사이트™ to our minds makes plain that neither separate use, nor separate disposal may be prohibited.
Conflicting views have been expressed about whether an explicit prohibition on separate use also imposes a prohibition on separate disposal.
In Gill Cartagena (VTD 20352), the Tribunal said it did, but in Martin James Gilbin (VTD 20352), the opposite view was taken that a dwelling can be disposed of separately even where separate use isn바카라 사이트™t permitted.
Our view is that a prohibition on separate use doesn바카라 사이트™t itself mean that separate disposal is forbidden. We agree with the reasoning in Gilbin:
The fact that a subsequent owner would be affected by the planning condition as to its use may mean that the granny annexe would have a small market value, but that would not prevent its disposal either by sale or by gift or by testamentary disposition.
The condition has been interpreted differently. The alternative view that if either separate use isn바카라 사이트™t prohibited or separate disposal isn바카라 사이트™t prohibited, the Note is met and the building is 바카라 사이트˜designed as a dwelling or number of dwellings바카라 사이트™. In other words, if the prohibition is only on one of the two limbs of Note 2(c), then it is 바카라 사이트˜designed as a dwelling or number of dwellings바카라 사이트™. The Tribunal decisions in Nick Hopewell-Smith (VTD 16725) and John Charles Munnery (VTD 17903) support this view. You shouldn바카라 사이트™t follow these decisions, as the weight of Tribunal decisions supports our interpretation.
It has also been put forward that the word 바카라 사이트˜separate바카라 사이트™ only applies to disposal, and not to use of the dwelling. This interpretation was rejected in the case of Philip Thompson (VTD 15834), where the property could be disposed of but not separately from an associated building.