Tandridge DC and Hitchinson Microtel Ltd
Language: English Series: Planning Appeal Decisions ; (1995) 10 PAD 112-115Publication details: 1995Subject(s): Summary: 9 August 1994. Telecommunications mast - alleged by appellant that works carried out at time when authorised by general development order (GDO) - Council contends that works not carried out until after GDO had been amended and appellant should first have obtained clearance from Council - enforcement notice quashed but application for award of costs refused. (Headnote from journal).| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Law report | London Journal article | X2195 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 22479-1001 |
Browsing London shelves, Shelving location: Journal article Close shelf browser (Hides shelf browser)
9 August 1994. Telecommunications mast - alleged by appellant that works carried out at time when authorised by general development order (GDO) - Council contends that works not carried out until after GDO had been amended and appellant should first have obtained clearance from Council - enforcement notice quashed but application for award of costs refused. (Headnote from journal).