Home   Canterbury   News   Article

Canterbury woodland owners lose High Court tussle to keep illegal structures

Three Kent woodland owners lost their tussle to keep illegal buildings and hard standing at the High Court today.

It is the latest saga in a long-running legal battle between the planning authorities and proprietors over the structures in ancient woodland at Adisham near Canterbury.

The illegal building in Prioress Wood, Aylesham
The illegal building in Prioress Wood, Aylesham
Developments in Tower Wood at Adisham were said to be an “urbanisation” of the woods
Developments in Tower Wood at Adisham were said to be an “urbanisation” of the woods

The landowners had argued the buildings were for “forestry purposes”, which is permitted in planning law.

But Canterbury City Council recently considered they went far beyond what was reasonable, including evidence of occupation, including lighting, tarmac roads and fencing.

Officers said there has been “urbanisation” of the woodland, resulting in “undesirable, sporadic development to the amenities of the countryside which is not justified by any particular local circumstances and contrary to planning policies”.

The authority issued enforcement notices against six woodland sites to remove the structures and make good the land - a decision that was subsequently backed by a planning inspector when five of them later appealed.

But the three landowners, who challenged the Secretary of State today (February 13) using provisions in the Town and Country Planning Act, had their bid to overturn the decision quashed at the Royal Courts of Justice in London.

They claimed the planning inspector had incorrectly followed procedure.

The illegal building in Cook Wood, Adisham
The illegal building in Cook Wood, Adisham
The illegal building in Beech Farm Wood, Adisham
The illegal building in Beech Farm Wood, Adisham

The cases related to Beech Farm Wood, Prioress Wood and Cook Wood, where the owners contested the validity of the enforcement notices on a point of law.

Speaking after today’s hearing, campaigners who have been fighting developments in Adisham’s ancient woodland since 2021, branded the High Court action as “ without substance”.

Watch Over Adisham's Woods (WOAW) spokesman David Conder said: “The developers must now remove their buildings - which they erected without planning permission - and make good the land. This in line with Canterbury City Council's enforcement notices.

'This wood was established by 1600AD/CE and probably for hundreds of years before that. Ancient Woodland should never be built upon except in cases of genuine national need which is clearly not the case here'.

Dismissing the case following the one-hour hearing, the judge agreed the case against the planning inspectorate was “without substance”.

Members have long been concerned over the carving up of swathes of ancient woodland to be sold off in small plots, fearing it has led to environmental damage as well as the disturbance of potential archaeology.

In Adisham’s case, it is the historic Oxenden Shaw Wood which now is split into different ownership.

One of the 'offending' buildings has now been removed from Woodland Woods at Adisham
One of the 'offending' buildings has now been removed from Woodland Woods at Adisham
The Law Courts, The Royal Courts of Justice, located in Westminster, houses the High Court and Court of Appeal of England and Wales
The Law Courts, The Royal Courts of Justice, located in Westminster, houses the High Court and Court of Appeal of England and Wales

But they have praised some woodland owners in the area for their responsible management.

One owner, john Horton has already removed a wooden chalet-style building and shipping container from Woodlands Wood, following the planning inspector’s decision.

But he had been adamant they were used for administration, shelter and storage all connected with forestry, claiming he had planted 100,000 trees and three miles of hedgerow.

Close This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies.Learn More