Links: Home | swarblaw - law discussions

swarb.co.uk - law index


These cases are from the lawindexpro database. They are now being transferred to the swarb.co.uk website in a better form. As a case is published there, an entry here will link to it. The swarb.co.uk site includes many later cases.  














Planning - From: 1992 To: 1992

This page lists 13 cases, and was prepared on 02 April 2018.

 
North East Fife District Council v Secretary of State for Scotland 1992 SLT 373
1992

Lord President Hope
Scotland, Planning
The court was asked as to the standing of the applicants to make their application. Lord President Hope said: "But in my opinion the fact that all three appellants were present at, and made representations at the public inquiry is sufficient for them to be persons 'aggrieved' . . they were entitled to expect that the Secretary of State, in considering their representations, would act within the powers conferred upon him by the statute and . . they are entitled to appeal against his decision on the ground that he has not done so."
1 Citers



 
 FG Whitley and Sons Co Ltd v Secretary of State for Wales; CA 1992 - (1992) 64 P&CR 296; Times, 02 April 1992; [1992] 3 PLR 72
 
Cambridge City Council --v Secretary of State for the Environment and Milton Park Investments Ltd (1992) 64 P & CR 257
1992
CA

Planning

1 Citers



 
 Gillingham Borough Council v Medway (Chatham) Dock Co Ltd; 1992 - [1993] QB 343; [1992] 3 All ER 923; [1992] 3 WLR 449
 
Farleyer Estates v Secretary of State for Scotland [1992] 2PLR 123
1992
IHCS

Planning, Scotland
An Enforcement Notice alleged unauthorised use of land as a timber storage and transfer area. The land so used was 1500 metres from forestry plantations. The appellant argued that it was concerned with “the use of land for the purposes of forestry” and that therefore development was not involved. This was rejected by the reporter on the grounds that the land against which the Enforcement Notice was directed was so physically divorced from the forest that he could not regard it as “an operation or use ancillary to forestry and I consider it rather to be a use of industrial character”. Held: “The cultivating of forests and the management of growing timber would include the felling of trees and the extraction of the timber from plantations. There would be little point in cultivating or managing forests unless the fruits of the operation in the sense of the felled timber were to be taken away from the plantation for commercial purposes. Accordingly, we are satisfied that the extraction of timber is included in the general term forestry. . . . In the light of the findings which the reporter has made in the present case, it is plain that, if timber were to be extracted from these plantations, there was no alternative to the movement of timber on the road through the village and that the use of the subjects described in the Enforcement Notice for stock piling timber extracted from the forest and transferring it onto the lorries was functionally essential to the running of these plantations commercially. That being so, we are satisfied that at the material time the subjects referred to in the Enforcement Notice were being used for the purposes of forestry. ........ In our opinion it does not matter that the subject s referred to in the Enforcement Notice were situated some 1500 metres from the plantations; what is important is not the fact that the subjects were physically divorced from the plantation but the use to which the subjects were being put."
Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1972
1 Citers


 
Mouchell Superannuation Fund Trustees and another v Oxfordshire County Council [1992] 1 PLR 97
1992
CA

Planning, Litigation Practice
The court has jurisdiction to grant a declaration, in a private law action, that a planning condition is invalid.
1 Citers



 
 Gillingham Borough Council v Medway (Chatham) Dock Co Ltd; CA 1992 - [1992] 3 All ER 923; [1993] QB 343; [1992] 3 WLR 449
 
North Wiltshire District Council v Secretary of State for the Environment [1992] 3 PLR 113
1992


Planning

1 Citers


 
Mole Valley District Council v Smith [1992] 90 LGR 557
1992


Planning, Local Government
The local authority sought to use its powers under the Act to enforce planning control over gypsies.
Local Government Act 1972 222
1 Citers



 
 Doncaster Borough Council v Green and Others; CA 15-Jan-1992 - Gazette, 15 January 1992

 
 South Lakeland District Council v Secretary of State for the Environment and Another; HL 1-Apr-1992 - Gazette, 01 April 1992
 
Colley and Another v Canterbury City Council Gazette, 20 May 1992
20 May 1992
CA

Planning
Assessment of compensation after withdrawal of permission after works begun.
Town and Country Planning Act 1990

 
Bloomsbury Health Authority v Secretary of State for the Environment Unreported, 27 July 1992
27 Jul 1992


Planning
Application was made for planning permission to use a redundant hospital building in Covent Garden for primarily office use. Policies of the local planning authority sought not only to restrain office use, but also to seek residential accommodation in, inter alia, the appeal building. The Inspector dismissed the appeal. Held: The decision letter was quashed. The Inspector had not applied, the BWB probability test as to the likelihood of residential use ultimately taking place within the building. The Secretary of State apparently accepted, in argument, that the BWB test applied in principle to a future use, though it was submitted that the test was not applicable where there was - as in that case - a planning objection to the proposed use.
1 Cites


 
Copyright 2014 David Swarbrick, 10 Halifax Road, Brighouse, West Yorkshire HD6 2AG.