The law ordinarily entitles a person whose land is taken for a highway to compensation unless the statutory intention to resume without compensation is expressed in clear and unambiguous terms. Lord Wilberforce described a use treated as established under planning law as: ‘analogous to a right established by prescription’.
Where a statutory procedure exists for taking away rights with compensation, the court will resist the argument that some other procedure is available for doing the same thing without compensation.
Judges:
Lord Wilberforce, Lord Reid
Citations:
[1965] AC 1134
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Colonial Sugar Refining Co Ltd v Melbourne Harbour Trust Commissioners PC 18-Jan-1927
An Act removing the right of appeal to the Privy Council was held not to affect an appeal in litigation pending when the Act was passed and decided after its passing, on the ground that (Lord Warrington) ‘[t]o deprive a suitor in pending litigation . .
Cited by:
Cited – Feakins and Another v Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs (Civ 1513) CA 9-Dec-2005
The department complained that the defendants had entered into a transaction with their farm at an undervalue so as to defeat its claim for recovery of sums due. The transaction used the grant of a tenancy by the first chargee.
Held: The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Torts – Other, Planning
Updated: 07 May 2022; Ref: scu.237726