The applicant challenged an order requiring him to discontinue use of land on which were listed buildings in need of repair. The authority had concluded that compulsory purchase would not be sufficient to achieve the result required. The land owner contended that such an order was draconian, and should not be made without additional evidence for its necessity.
Held: The true requirement was that the authority was required to be shown to be decisively in the public interest. The continued use would have negatived the attempt to restore the buildings. The inspector had properly balanced the need to restore the buildings and the needs of the settings. His human rights to enjoy his property had not been infringed, because of the public need to restore the buildings and the owners rights, and he would be compensated.
Judges:
Mr Justice Sullivan
Citations:
Gazette 11-Jul-2002
Statutes:
Town and Country Planning Act 1990 102
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Coleen Properties Ltd v Minister of Housing and Local Government CA 26-Jan-1971
The Minister confirmed a compulsory purchase order despite it having been made without any supporting evidence.
Held: The order was set aside. The Minister had erred in not following his Inspector’s conclusion that a compulsory purchase order . .
Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for Transport, ex parte de Rothschild CA 1988
The court considered the use of powers of compulsory purchase of land under the Acts.
Held: ‘In answer to counsel’s submissions as to ‘special rules’, I summarise my conclusions thus. First, I do not accept that any special rules beyond the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Planning, Human Rights
Updated: 14 July 2022; Ref: scu.174321