Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú

A man has won a legal battle to keep his garden shed - after attaching wheels and transforming it into "a mobile, moveable structure".

James Kershaw was fined £700 with costs of £2,300 when Pembrokeshire planners initially won a court case, saying he had put the shed up without permission.

The council claimed the shed blocked views of a Grade II listed 12th Century priory on land owned by Mr Kershaw.

His appeal was upheld at Swansea Crown Court and was given thousands in costs.

Pembrokeshire council wanted the shed demolished on the basis of "harm" to the ruins of Pill Priory, near Milford Haven.

The authority claimed the wheels had been added after it issued an enforcement notice in February 2018

But Mr Kershaw argued that, in fact, the wheels had been put on inside the shed in 2015.

He was originally convicted at Llanelli Magistrates Court in June, when the district judge said he was satisfied the shed remained a building despite its wheels and rejected the claim it was intended to be moved around the yard.

Matthew Paul, defending Mr Kershaw, told the original hearing that his client made a deliberate decision to test the legal position but his actions were not for personal gain - and needed a shed for his business tools.

Speaking after his successful appeal, Mr Kershaw said the council's "pointless legal challenge" had cost taxpayers thousands.

"The shed doesn't harm anyone and is a mobile, movable structure which replaces a more permanent shed which was dilapidated and in the same location," said the gardener and tree surgeon.

"I hope the council can concentrate now on more pressing issues."

The council said while it accepted the court's decision it "wishes to point out that the ruling hinged on a legal argument."

Councillor Phil Baker, the cabinet member for planning and infrastructure, said: "The council is keen to stress that it should not be accepted that the outcome of this case implies that by adding wheels to a structure that it is no longer a building and therefore not subject to planning regulations."