South Bucks DC v Porter; Wrexham CBC v Berry; Chichester DC v Searle and others
South Bucks DC v Porter; Wrexham CBC v Berry; Chichester DC v Searle and others
- 2003
- Weekly Law Reports [2003] 2 WLR 1547-1585(39) .
[2003] UKHL 26, 22 May 2003. Appeals in three cases by local planning authorities challenging the guidance on the grant of injunctions under the Town Country Planning Act 1990 s187b ([2001] EWCA Civ 1549, Abs65647). The respondents were gypsies living on land without planning permission and in each case the local authorities were granted injunctions to restrain a breach of planning control. The gypsies appealed and won on the grounds that the judge had failed to consider the issue of proportionality and was in breach of the Human Rights Act 1998 s6(1). Held: appeals dismissed. The jurisdiction to grant an injunction under s187b was an original, not a supervisory injunction and the decision to grant an injunction was not proportionate because it failed to consider any personal hardship which would result. View judgment at www.parliament.the-stationary-office.co.uk.
GYPSIES
INJUNCTION
BREACH OF PLANNING CONTROL
PROPORTIONALITY
TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT 1990 S187(B)
HUMAN RIGHTS ACT 1998 S6(1)
WREXHAM BC V BERRY
SOUTH BUCKS DC V PORTER
CHICHESTER DC V SEARLE AND OTHERS
[2003] UKHL 26, 22 May 2003. Appeals in three cases by local planning authorities challenging the guidance on the grant of injunctions under the Town Country Planning Act 1990 s187b ([2001] EWCA Civ 1549, Abs65647). The respondents were gypsies living on land without planning permission and in each case the local authorities were granted injunctions to restrain a breach of planning control. The gypsies appealed and won on the grounds that the judge had failed to consider the issue of proportionality and was in breach of the Human Rights Act 1998 s6(1). Held: appeals dismissed. The jurisdiction to grant an injunction under s187b was an original, not a supervisory injunction and the decision to grant an injunction was not proportionate because it failed to consider any personal hardship which would result. View judgment at www.parliament.the-stationary-office.co.uk.
GYPSIES
INJUNCTION
BREACH OF PLANNING CONTROL
PROPORTIONALITY
TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT 1990 S187(B)
HUMAN RIGHTS ACT 1998 S6(1)
WREXHAM BC V BERRY
SOUTH BUCKS DC V PORTER
CHICHESTER DC V SEARLE AND OTHERS