London Residuary Body v Lambeth LBC and others
London Residuary Body v Lambeth LBC and others
- 1991
- Property and Compensation Reports (1991) 61 PCR 65-76(7) .
HL 10 May 1990. On the abolition of the Greater London Council County Hall became vested in the London Residuary Body . In order to dispose of the building at the best price, as required by statute, the LRB applied to the local authority for planning permission to use the main building of the complex as offices . On appeal to SoS the inspector who had held the public inquiry recommended that consent be refused on the grounds that there was a greater need for the public bodies in occupation of the building to remain, than for planning permission to be granted for office use (the competing needs test ). The SoS accepted this but gave more weight to the recommendation in Circular 14/85 that there was always a presumption in favour of granting planning permission unless to do so would cause demonstrable harm to an interest of acknowledged importance, and granted the permission. On appeal to HC the decision was quashed on the grounds that the inspector had not given adequate reasons for h
CASE LAW
CHANGE OF USE
LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT 1985
HL 10 May 1990. On the abolition of the Greater London Council County Hall became vested in the London Residuary Body . In order to dispose of the building at the best price, as required by statute, the LRB applied to the local authority for planning permission to use the main building of the complex as offices . On appeal to SoS the inspector who had held the public inquiry recommended that consent be refused on the grounds that there was a greater need for the public bodies in occupation of the building to remain, than for planning permission to be granted for office use (the competing needs test ). The SoS accepted this but gave more weight to the recommendation in Circular 14/85 that there was always a presumption in favour of granting planning permission unless to do so would cause demonstrable harm to an interest of acknowledged importance, and granted the permission. On appeal to HC the decision was quashed on the grounds that the inspector had not given adequate reasons for h
CASE LAW
CHANGE OF USE
LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT 1985