The Upper Tribunal decision in Roy Shields (UKUT0453) provides an unusually detailed consideration of the vexed question of whether an 'occupational restriction' clause in a planning consent has the effect of prohibiting separate use of a dwelling. Where that is the case, the DIY scheme will not apply to the construction of that dwelling (and there are similar restrictions on the building's VAT treatment in other contexts). In this case the FTT had decided that the restriction of occupation to an employee of a specified adjoining equestrian business was not enough to 'prohibit' separate use from that business. This had appeared to follow precedent that, where the permission was expressed as applying to the intended occupant, it did not affect the actual use of the building per se. This was never an easy concept to follow.
展开▼
