At a meeting with Council Officers, the Appellants were told that they did not need consent for advertisements under the advertisements regulations. In reliance on that advice advertisements were erected and the Council then prosecuted the Appellants for not obtaining the necessary consent. The defendants appealed a refusal of a stay for abuse of process.
Held: The court commented on the absence of a warning letter from the prosecutor. The opportunity of challenging a prosecution was a possible abuse of process.
Schiemann LJ, Moses J
[1997] EWHC Admin 1002, Times 08-Dec-1997
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Norbrook Laboratories Ltd v Department of The Environment for Northern Ireland CANI 6-Sep-2011
. .
These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 09 June 2021; Ref: scu.251559