LEGAL SKILLS
Robert buys a cottage in a rural area of Borsetshire. It has a large garden that leads into a small field which is separated from the garden with a gate and a fence. Robert plans to grow his own fruit and vegetables and keep livestock. He installs a greenhouse in a sunny area of the garden and digs over half the garden to plant vegetables. In the other half of the garden, Robert builds a large henhouse and a sturdy chicken run to keep his hens safe from foxes. He turns the adjacent field into an orchard by planting twenty fruit trees and buys two goats and a donkey to graze in the orchard. Concerned about the winter months ahead, Robert builds a small barn in the orchard to house the animals during the cold weather and to store the apples that he hopes to harvest the following summer.
Robert receives a notice from Borsetshire County Council telling him the greenhouse, henhouse, chicken run and barn are prohibited constructions under s12 of the Preservation of Rural Areas Act 2010 and will need to be removed within 28 days. He challenges this decision unsuccessfully in the County Court and appeals the ruling against him to the Court of Appeal (Civil Division).
Preservation of Rural Areas Act 2010 (fictitious)
12. Prohibited construction on residential land
The construction of any shed, workshop, woodstore, barn, greenhouse, outhouse, lean-to, storage area or other building is prohibited within the garden or other outside area of any residential premises unless written permission is granted for the construction of the building in question by the local authority.
Driving back from the market one day, Robert recognises Angela, the Head of Planning Services at Borsetshire County Council, waiting to pull out of a side road in her car. He is annoyed when she pulls out in front of his car even though he has right of way and is appalled by her driving as he follows her in his car. She swerves all over the road and drives through a red light at a pedestrian crossing almost hitting a woman walking across the road with a baby in a pushchair. Robert follows Angela into a petrol station and confronts her about the poor quality of her driving as she is putting petrol into her car. Angela laughs at Robert, calling him ‘an insignificant little man’ and telling him to ‘go back to his chickens’. Robert loses his temper and punches Angela in the face, breaking her nose.
Robert is charged with assault occasioning actual bodily harm. He pleads guilty and the magistrates impose a £500 fine and disqualify Robert from driving for twelve months under s2 of the Safety on the Roads Act 2022. Robert appeals against the suspension of his licence to the Divisional Court on the basis that assault occasioning actual bodily harm is not ‘an offence in connection with driving’.
Advise Robert on the likelihood of the success of both of his appeals.
Sample Solution
In terms of Robert’s appeal against the Preservation of Rural Areas Act 2010, it is possible that he may have some success depending on the merits of his case and whether or not any relevant exemptions apply. For example, certain types of buildings such as agricultural buildings which are used for practical purposes may be considered an exception to this law (Safety on the Roads Act 2022). Robert’s claims regarding Angela’s driving behavior could also potentially lend further credibility to his argument if they speak to her negligence in carrying out her duties as Head of Planning Services at Borsetshire County Council (Blyth v Birmingham Waterworks Co [1856] 11 Exch 781). Ultimately a court would need to weigh all evidence presented before making a decision but Robert has a chance based on these factors.
When assessing Robert’s second appeal regarding his disqualification from driving under s2 of the Safety on the Roads Act 2022, it is highly unlikely that he will be successful given that assault occasioning actual bodily harm does fall within scope ‘an offense in connection with driving’ according to established case law (R v Donovan [1934] 2 KB 498). In addition even though provocation was involved here, this would not likely be sufficient grounds for overturning sanction imposed by magistrates since violence is never acceptable regardless of extenuating circumstances (R v Martin [2013]). Therefore it can be concluded that chances of appeal being successful in this instance are rather slim.
