A restaurant boss who admitted building an outdoor dining enclosure without planning permission may now try to reverse his guilty pleas - claiming he did not fully understand an earlier court hearing because there was no Turkish interpreter.

Mehmet Dari, who runs A La Turka on Herne Bay seafront, was due to be sentenced after admitting two offences relating to the illegal shelter - but the case was adjourned so he could seek further legal advice and consider taking the case to trial.

The dispute centres on a £20,000 glass-fronted shelter Dari built outside the restaurant in 2019. While the 45-year-old had permission for three retractable awnings, magistrates were told the enclosure – with its tall windows, metal supports and laminate flooring – went far beyond what was approved.

Kent County Council (KCC), which holds access rights to the land, said the structure obstructed a public highway and prevented work on underground utilities. It issued an enforcement notice in 2021, requiring its removal, but when that was ignored, the council took legal action against Dari and his company, Balikaya Holdings Ltd.

In July, unable to find his own lawyer, Dari accepted free advice from a duty solicitor and pleaded guilty to wilfully obstructing a public highway and failing to comply with a notice under the Highways Act.

Sentencing was postponed so he could supply financial details for himself and his firm, with chair of the bench Ian White warning: “You need to bring your means on that day, no excuse.” Dari confirmed he knew what was required.

But when he returned to Thanet Magistrates’ Court last week, he was represented by Simon Bell, a barrister specialising in planning disputes, who said his client had not fully understood what had taken place at the previous hearing.

Mr Bell told the bench: “He saw the duty solicitor without a Turkish interpreter, and he didn’t fully understand, in effect, the pleas and the sentence. With the benefit of an interpreter, the points in mitigation I’ve been asked to consider suggest the pleas are equivocal.”

The lawyer said he had only been instructed the previous Friday and received the case papers the day before the hearing, explaining they had already cast some doubt as to whether any offences had actually been committed.

He told magistrates there had been judgments made at the Court of Appeal on similar cases, where the obstruction to the highway had been found to be “de minimis” – too minor to amount to an offence.

He also questioned whether Dari had “wilfully” obstructed the pavement as it had previously been used as a seating area, but said he would need more time to consider whether to apply to have the guilty pleas withdrawn.

“Having an hour with the defendant and interpreter to take full instruction on eventual defences that indicate facts and law which need to be determined by the court is not an ideal basis to make an ad hoc application at this stage,” he added.

At July’s hearing, Dari was warned again that the shelter had to be removed, with the court told this had finally happened just days before last week’s sentencing hearing.

Mr Bell said Dari believed the existing awning permission allowed him to use the space covered by the shelter, adding it could have been disassembled and moved back if required for access.

“The structure has now been taken down, but there is a dispute about how effective that’s been,” he added. “The planters are left, and they are on wheels outside.”

Mr Bell said KCC had since indicated it would not object to the restaurant’s planters remaining.

He described Dari, who has lived in Britain since 1999 and opened his first restaurant in 2002, as a businessman of previous good character.

“In terms of linguistic skills, conversation in English is fine, but delving into the language of law is more difficult,” he said. “It’s in the interests of public justice to allow the adjournment.”

KCC’s lawyer, George Mackenzie, opposed the request, arguing the restaurateur had long known what the case involved.

He said Dari’s English was proficient and that he had shown full understanding during earlier dealings with both the court and the council.

Mr Mackenzie told magistrates: “To say he didn’t understand on the last occasion, well, the claim is unfounded, it’s baseless.

“Mr Dari was well aware at the last hearing that he needed legal advice, and he simply sat on his hands. He confirmed he understood what the magistrates did and said on the last occasion.

“There is no prospect of anything other than a conviction; no points raised [today] have any merit, the footprint of the highway covered was completely obstructed.”

He said there was “no lawful excuse” for the construction and that Dari had been warned as early as 2021 to remove it. He added that it was unclear what the defence would be to the willful obstruction charge.

“He erected the structure and I can only describe that as a willful action. There is lack of lawful excuse; he never had any planning permission for the structure, and an application was made later, but it was refused,” he continued.

“These are the points KCC has been explaining to him for five years, and he was asked by the magistrates [on the last occasion] to confirm he understood the charges and pleas of guilty, and he confirmed, yes, he did.

“He had also taken lengthy advice from the duty solicitor before he entered the guilty pleas.

“He’s had numerous meetings with the council face-to-face and on Teams [video meetings] for years. He’s a skilled business operator and has other extension licences at other properties.

“It illustrates some degree of sophisticated understanding of the English language. He has multiple businesses and emails regularly on other regulations within the council.”

The prosecutor said KCC had so far spent £39,000 of public funds on the case, while officers and even Dari’s local MP, Sir Roger Gale, had previously urged him to get legal advice.

“To adjourn again would cause major delay,” he added.

Mr Bell maintained the request for more time was reasonable, saying the issues were complex and that the earlier lack of an interpreter gave grounds to review the case.

After hearing both sides, magistrates said they were concerned that Dari’s original hearing went ahead without a translator and that they had not seen the advice given by the duty solicitor.

They accepted there were grounds to delay sentencing so Mr Bell could consider filing a written application to reopen the guilty pleas.

The case was adjourned until January 19, when the court will decide whether Dari can withdraw his pleas or if sentencing will go ahead.