R v Department of Trade and Industry ex p. Healaugh Farms
Language: English Series: Property and Compensation Reports ; [1996] 72 P&CR 1-9(5)Publication details: 1996Subject(s): Summary: QBD 13 December 1995. H owned land over which the National Grid proposed to construct new overhead powerlines. N applied to SoS Trade and Industry under the Electricity Act 1989 Para6 Sch4 for a compulsory wayleave. The DTI inspector fell ill after initial hearing and H sought assurance that SoS would pay his costs arising from the aborted hearing. SoS replied that there was no provision for any party to a wayleave to pay the costs of another. H applied for judicial review. "Held" that a hearing was an inquiry for the Tribunal and Inquiries Act 1971 and not the Electricity Act 1989 s62. There was no reason why an objector to compulsory wayleave proceedings should be worse off than objectors in any other proceedings. Application dismissed.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Law report | London Journal article | ABS55337 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 15840-1001 |
QBD 13 December 1995. H owned land over which the National Grid proposed to construct new overhead powerlines. N applied to SoS Trade and Industry under the Electricity Act 1989 Para6 Sch4 for a compulsory wayleave. The DTI inspector fell ill after initial hearing and H sought assurance that SoS would pay his costs arising from the aborted hearing. SoS replied that there was no provision for any party to a wayleave to pay the costs of another. H applied for judicial review. "Held" that a hearing was an inquiry for the Tribunal and Inquiries Act 1971 and not the Electricity Act 1989 s62. There was no reason why an objector to compulsory wayleave proceedings should be worse off than objectors in any other proceedings. Application dismissed.