Temporary works meaning

In this issue When planning permission is required Planning enforcement Obtaining, amending and implementing planning permission Nationally significant infrastructure projects Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Related Documents When planning permission is required Court clarifies scope of section 55 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and resolving ambiguity in prior approvals (Dharmeshkumar v SSLUHC) In Dharmeshkumar v SSLUHC, the High Court found that substantial refurbishment amounted to “development” for the purposes of section 55 of the TCPA 1990, as it materially altered the building’s outward appearance and therefore required express consent. The court also confirmed that any uncertainty within prior approvals can be resolved by referring to the application paperwork and drawings, ensuring compliant aspects remain authorised while only non-compliant works face enforcement. See News Analysis: Court clarifies scope of section 55 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and resolving ambiguity in prior approvals (Dharmeshkumar v SSLUHC). Planning...

In this issue: Governance Planning Social housing Children’s social care Social care Healthcare Education Environmental law and climate change Local government finance Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Governance Equality Act 2010 provisions refer to biological sex, regardless of gender recognition certificate (For Women Scotland v Scottish Ministers) The Supreme Court ruled that, within the Equality Act 2010 (EqA 2010), the words ‘man’, ‘woman’ and ‘sex’ denote biological sex. Treating the relevant provisions as embracing ‘certificated sex’ by virtue of a gender recognition certificate (GRC) would render them incoherent and unworkable, and thus cannot be done. For sex discrimination claims, an individual has the protected characteristic of biological sex only. The relevant parts of the EqA 2010 fall within section 9(3) of the Gender Recognition Act 2004 (GRA 2004), and so displace the section 9(1) rule that a person with a GRC is, for all purposes, of the acquired...

For our first overview of HC 1691, concentrating on matters addressed in the EM, see LNB News 05/03/2026 54. Suitability All changes apply to decisions made on or after 26 March 2026. Extension of para SUI 11.3 to entry clearance applications In a notable development omitted from the EM, the discretionary basis for refusing permission to enter and stay applications at para SUI 11.3—introduced when Part 9 was replaced by Part Suitability on 11 November 2025—has now been extended to entry clearance applications. As set out in the Practice Note: Suitability grounds for refusal and cancellation of permission, this provides the Home Office with an additional basis to refuse an entry clearance application where an individual is, or has been, in breach of immigration laws, even if the mandatory, time-limited re-entry bans in para SUI 12.1 have expired, and even where the applicant has not taken steps to frustrate immigration controls...

Introduction The intra-EU posting of third-country nationals (TCNs) has become an increasingly prevalent and widely used form of labour mobility, whereby undertakings based in one Member State send staff to deliver services on a temporary basis in another across the Union. Anchored in Article 56 TFEU on the freedom to provide services, this practice draws on the seminal Vander Elst judgment, Case C‑43/93, which clearly confirmed that Member States may not demand additional work permits from lawfully employed TCNs seconded from a different Member State. Although Directive 96/71/EC, the Posting of Workers Directive (PWD), as revised by Directive 2018/957/EU and supplemented by Directive 2014/67/EU on its enforcement, sets out the overarching legal regime for posting, these measures do not spell out the particular arrangements applicable to TCNs (for more on the PWD, see Practice Note: Posting of workers in the EU). Furthermore, the Directive does not prejudice agreements concluded by the Community with third countries, nor the domestic rules of Member States governing the admission to their territory of...

This review examines the principal amendments to the Immigration Rules (the Rules) contained in HC 617. Released on 10 September 2021 with an Explanatory Memorandum, it is lengthy. Readers can jump to particular sections of this note rapidly via the Table of Contents bar on the left of the screen for quick navigation. Beyond unveiling the International Sportsperson route and renaming the remaining temporary work routes, the Statement of Changes makes numerous small adjustments across assorted areas of detail. These involve minor fixes to policy points and alterations to terminology/wording that have emerged in relation to routes streamlined for the post‑Brexit Immigration framework in HC 813 as implemented. Frequently, revisions are delivered through wholesale paragraph replacement, which gives them a more weighty appearance than they truly warrant (and also increases the time a user must spend to pinpoint what has in fact been altered in practice). This is especially true for the Appendix EU and Appendix EU (Family Permit) revisions within this document. The Law Commission’s very precise proposal that...

Under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (TCPA 1990), a breach of planning control is subject to enforcement action. For these purposes, a breach of planning control refers to the following: undertaking development without obtaining the necessary planning permission—this entails that unauthorised works or a material change of use amounting to development within the meaning of TCPA 1990, s 55 have taken place, and that such development requires planning permission which has not been secured not adhering to any condition or restriction attached to a grant of planning permission—this covers any of the limitations or conditions applied to individual permitted development rights in the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015, SI 2015/596 in England and the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995, SI 1995/418 in Wales See Practice Note: Planning—enforcement for further detail on planning breaches. TCPA 1990, s 171A states that ‘taking enforcement action’ also includes issuing an enforcement notice, serving a breach...

[ Insert in para 6.1 of claim form ET3: ] It is accepted that the Claimant works as a legal secretary, and it is accepted that the First Respondent is a temporary work agency. It is accepted that the Claimant holds a contract with the First Respondent to supply legal secretarial services to the First Respondent’s clients; however, it is denied that this arrangement amounts to a contract of employment. It is accepted that there was an agreement between the Claimant and the First Respondent under which the Claimant would provide legal secretarial services to the Second Respondent. Save that it is accepted that the Claimant began working for the Second Respondent on [ insert date ], the matters alleged at Paragraphs 2, 3 and 4 of the Grounds of Claim are not within the First Respondent’s knowledge and are therefore not admitted...

[ Insert in para 8.2 of claim form ET1: ] 1 The Claimant works as an agency worker for the First Respondent, a temporary employment agency. She started assignment with the Second Respondent on [ insert date ]...

[ Insert in para 6.1 of claim form ET3: ] It is accepted that the Claimant works as a [ legal secretary ], and it is further accepted that the First Respondent is a temporary employment agency. The Second Respondent has no knowledge of the nature or terms of any contract between the Claimant and the First Respondent and therefore makes no admission on that matter. It is also accepted that an arrangement existed between the First and Second Respondents for the Claimant to deliver legal secretarial services to the Second Respondent. It is accepted that the Claimant began working on [ insert date ]. She attended an induction on [ insert date ], during which she was informed that she would require a staff card to access certain of the Second Respondent's facilities, including the staff canteen. She was also informed that, to obtain a staff card, she must provide the HR department with a passport-sized photograph of herself...

Practice Note: Suitability grounds for refusal and cancellation of permission notes that, under the Immigration Rules, Part 9, para 320(7B): Unless an exemption applies, or the relevant re-entry ban has expired, any application made under a route within Parts 2–8, or under Appendix Armed Forces, must be refused where the person has previously breached UK immigration law by: overstaying, unless the overstay was 90 days or less (where it began before 6 April 2017) or 30 days or less (where it began on or after 6 April 2017) and, in either scenario, they left the UK of their own accord and not at public expense Where any of the above circumstances apply, any further application to re-enter the UK will be refused until the following re-entry ban has run: one year, if the individual departed the UK voluntarily and not at public expense—note that those refused entry at port fall within this category, provided they complied with the conditions set...