Which remedy involves the seller applying for permission after the breach has occurred?

Which remedy involves the seller applying for permission after the breach has occurred?

• A. Retrospective planning permission
• B. Demolition of affected structures
• C. Immediate injunctive relief
• D. Warning notice only

Answer: (A)

Retrospective planning permission is the remedy that involves applying for permission after the breach has occurred. When development or works have taken place without proper planning consent, the owner can seek retrospective permission to regularize what has been done, hoping the local planning authority will approve it despite the post hoc nature of the application. This contrasts with demolition, which would undo the breach but isn’t about obtaining permission after the event; it’s a corrective action, not a regularization. Immediate injunctive relief is an order to stop or limit activities going forward, rather than securing permission after the fact. A warning notice is simply a procedural step alerting authorities to a breach and inviting enforcement action, not a remedy that cures the breach by granting permission.

Retrospective planning permission is the remedy that involves applying for permission after the breach has occurred. When development or works have taken place without proper planning consent, the owner can seek retrospective permission to regularize what has been done, hoping the local planning authority will approve it despite the post hoc nature of the application. This contrasts with demolition, which would undo the breach but isn’t about obtaining permission after the event; it’s a corrective action, not a regularization. Immediate injunctive relief is an order to stop or limit activities going forward, rather than securing permission after the fact. A warning notice is simply a procedural step alerting authorities to a breach and inviting enforcement action, not a remedy that cures the breach by granting permission.