Wyldecrest Parks (Management) Ltd v North Northamptonshire Council

A site-licence condition requiring consent for layout changes must be clear, workable and proportionate. Where consent is not unreasonably to be withheld, an unreasonable refusal removes the restriction, and a failure to decide within an agreed period may have the same consequence if the condition so provides. The First-tier Tribunal cannot convert a request for consent into an application to vary the licence or confer an appellate jurisdiction which the statute does not provide. A licence condition under the Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960 must be assessed in the form actually under appeal. Long-standing parking requirements will not be unduly burdensome without evidence that compliance is impossible.

The appellant operated a protected residential caravan site under a site licence issued by the respondent council under the Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960. It appealed against three conditions. Condition 6 required prior consent for layout changes; condition 11 regulated emergency-vehicle access; and condition 34 required one parking space per caravan plus one additional space for every five caravans.

The First-tier Tribunal varied condition 6, accepted a revised form of condition 11, and upheld condition 34. The appeal concerned whether condition 6 was unduly burdensome and whether the FTT had unlawfully or unfairly permitted the council to introduce a retrospective variation of condition 11.

1. Condition 6. The FTT’s amended condition was set aside. A request for consent to alter the site layout is distinct from an application to vary the licence. The FTT could not deem the former to be the latter or create a right of appeal under section 8(2) of the Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960 where the statutory jurisdiction was not engaged (paras 37–42).
2. The decision in Wyldecrest Parks (Management) Ltd v Guildford Borough Council [2017] UKUT 433 (LC) did not authorise the FTT’s approach. It identified a two-stage route: after refusal of consent, the site owner could apply separately to vary the licence and then appeal against refusal of that variation. It did not treat refusal of consent itself as refusal of an application to vary the licence (paras 43–54).
3. The original condition 6 was unduly burdensome. It applied to changes of any significance, conflicted with the plan requirement, imposed no decision period, offered no straightforward means of challenging refusal, and duplicated safeguards in other licence conditions. The condition was remade to apply only to significant changes, require determination within 28 days, and permit the change without consent if no decision was made within that period (paras 58–65). The common-law consequence of an unreasonable refusal was applied consistently with Treloar v Biggs (1874) LR 9 Ex 151.
4. Condition 11. The FTT erred by treating the council’s proposed revision as part of the condition under appeal. The appeal was against the licence issued in April 2023, not a later proposed variation. The council could alter the licence only through the statutory procedure in section 8, which it had not used. The original condition was therefore restored (paras 66–74).
5. Condition 34. The challenge failed. The requirement had been included since at least 1997, and there was no evidence that the required parking spaces could not be provided. If necessary, the operator had to reduce the number of caravans to comply (paras 75–76).

The appeal was allowed against conditions 6 and 11 and dismissed against condition 34. The parties were directed to agree the final licence, which the council was then to re-issue (paras 77–78).

• First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber): On 15 April 2025, varied some licence conditions, upheld condition 34, imposed an amended condition 6, and accepted the council’s revised condition 11.
• Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber): Allowed the appeal against conditions 6 and 11, dismissed the appeal against condition 34, remade condition 6, and restored condition 11 to its original form.