Planning permission
Series: Estates Gazette Case Summaries ; [2001] EGCS 34(1) (17/03/01)Publication details: 2001Subject(s): Summary: "R v Restormel BC, ex parte Corbett" CA 2 March 2001. L& P Property Ltd were granted 3 outline planning permissions enabling them to erect buildings for non-food retail use. As a result of an inquiry the grants of planning permission were found to be wrong as they conflicted with development plan policies. It was recommended that permission be modified by removing non-food retail use from the matters permitted enabling L&P to claim compensation. The appellant councillor applied to have this quashed. Held, the council had acted unlawfully in granting the 1997 permission and refused to quash it. The appellant appealed.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Law report | London News article | WB3712-28 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 111518-1001 |
"R v Restormel BC, ex parte Corbett" CA 2 March 2001. L& P Property Ltd were granted 3 outline planning permissions enabling them to erect buildings for non-food retail use. As a result of an inquiry the grants of planning permission were found to be wrong as they conflicted with development plan policies. It was recommended that permission be modified by removing non-food retail use from the matters permitted enabling L&P to claim compensation. The appellant councillor applied to have this quashed. Held, the council had acted unlawfully in granting the 1997 permission and refused to quash it. The appellant appealed.