Aston Cantlow and Wilmcote with Billesley PCC v Wallbank and another
Aston Cantlow and Wilmcote with Billesley PCC v Wallbank and another
- 2001
- Weekly Law Reports [2001] 3 WLR 1323-1338(15) .
CA 17 May 2001. Appeal by the defendant (W) from the decision in favour of the claimants (A) on a preliminary issue regarding whether the alleged obligation of the defendants to carry out repairs to the chancel of a parish church contravened their rights under the European Convention of Human Rights. The defendants (W) were the freehold owners of former rectorial property under an inclosure award of 1743. In September 1994 the parochial church council served a notice under the Chancel Repairs Act 1932 s2(1) calling upon the defendants to repair the chancel. On appeal W contended that the PCC was a public authority within the Human Rights Act 1998 s6 and so it could not act incompatibly with the defendants' rights under the Convention; and the PPC's actions in trying to enforce the defendants' alleged liability were unlawful by reason of Protocol Art1 and/or Art.14 of the Convention. Appeal allowed. Copy of full judgement available on http://porch.ccta.gov.uk/courtser/judgements.nsf/Search/922B101EA4112A5680256A53004E8F7C?OpenDocument.
ASTON CANTLOW AND WILMCOTE WITH BILLESLEY PCC V WALLBANK AND ANOTHER
CONVENTION FOR THE PROTECTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS AND FUNDAMENTAL FREEDOMS ART 6
CONVENTION FOR THE PROTECTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS AND FUNDAMENTAL FREEDOMS ART 14
HUMAN RIGHTS
HUMAN RIGHTS ACT 1998
PUBLIC AUTHORITIES
REPAIRING LIABILITY
TAX
CHANCEL REPAIR LIABILITY
CONVENTION FOR THE PROTECTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS AND FUNDAMENTAL FREEDOMS FIRST PROTOCOL ART 1
PAROCHIAL CHURCH COUNCIL OF THE PARISH OF ASTON CANTLOW AND WILMCOTE WITH BILLESLEY WARWICKSHIRE V WALLBANK
CA 17 May 2001. Appeal by the defendant (W) from the decision in favour of the claimants (A) on a preliminary issue regarding whether the alleged obligation of the defendants to carry out repairs to the chancel of a parish church contravened their rights under the European Convention of Human Rights. The defendants (W) were the freehold owners of former rectorial property under an inclosure award of 1743. In September 1994 the parochial church council served a notice under the Chancel Repairs Act 1932 s2(1) calling upon the defendants to repair the chancel. On appeal W contended that the PCC was a public authority within the Human Rights Act 1998 s6 and so it could not act incompatibly with the defendants' rights under the Convention; and the PPC's actions in trying to enforce the defendants' alleged liability were unlawful by reason of Protocol Art1 and/or Art.14 of the Convention. Appeal allowed. Copy of full judgement available on http://porch.ccta.gov.uk/courtser/judgements.nsf/Search/922B101EA4112A5680256A53004E8F7C?OpenDocument.
ASTON CANTLOW AND WILMCOTE WITH BILLESLEY PCC V WALLBANK AND ANOTHER
CONVENTION FOR THE PROTECTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS AND FUNDAMENTAL FREEDOMS ART 6
CONVENTION FOR THE PROTECTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS AND FUNDAMENTAL FREEDOMS ART 14
HUMAN RIGHTS
HUMAN RIGHTS ACT 1998
PUBLIC AUTHORITIES
REPAIRING LIABILITY
TAX
CHANCEL REPAIR LIABILITY
CONVENTION FOR THE PROTECTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS AND FUNDAMENTAL FREEDOMS FIRST PROTOCOL ART 1
PAROCHIAL CHURCH COUNCIL OF THE PARISH OF ASTON CANTLOW AND WILMCOTE WITH BILLESLEY WARWICKSHIRE V WALLBANK