Image from Google Jackets

Slough Industrial Estates Ltd v Secretary of State for the Environment and Another

Language: English Series: Estates Gazette ; 280 (6313) 6 December 1986,1257-1259 (3)Publication details: 1986Subject(s): Summary: QBD 9 October 1986. An application under Town and Country Planning Act 1971 s245 to quash the decision of an inspector. The inspector had dismissed the applicants` appeal under s36 of the Act challenging the imposition of an occupancy condition on planning permission for the development of units at an industrial estate near Oxford . The condition restricted, for ten years, occupation of units to those who had occupied premises for at least two years within the area of the Oxford Local Plan and certain other local plans. The object was to restrict new growth in the Oxford area. The applicants criticised the inspector`s decision, objecting to the inspector`s dismissal of their claim that the occupancy condition was onerous and a major obstacle to the successful marketing of the units and to his dismissal of their argument based on increased unemployment in the area which suggested that any local occupancy condition was unnecessary and inappropriate. It was held that the applicants had
Holdings
Item type Current library Call number Copy number Status Barcode
Law report London Journal article ABS37238 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) 1 Available 3134-1001

QBD 9 October 1986. An application under Town and Country Planning Act 1971 s245 to quash the decision of an inspector. The inspector had dismissed the applicants` appeal under s36 of the Act challenging the imposition of an occupancy condition on planning permission for the development of units at an industrial estate near Oxford . The condition restricted, for ten years, occupation of units to those who had occupied premises for at least two years within the area of the Oxford Local Plan and certain other local plans. The object was to restrict new growth in the Oxford area. The applicants criticised the inspector`s decision, objecting to the inspector`s dismissal of their claim that the occupancy condition was onerous and a major obstacle to the successful marketing of the units and to his dismissal of their argument based on increased unemployment in the area which suggested that any local occupancy condition was unnecessary and inappropriate. It was held that the applicants had