Permitted development
Language: English Series: Estates Gazette Case Summaries ; (1994) EGCS 112(1) (25/6/94)Publication details: 1994Subject(s): Summary: "Peacock v SoS Environment and another" CA 14 June 1994. Replacement of a poultry house was not allowed as it would have been within 25m of a classified road and the development would be outside the exemptions under Town and Country Planning General Development Order 1988. The appellants` submission that the GDO created a presumption in favour of development was dismissed. The building of a poultry house did not come within permitted development.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Law report | London Journal article | WB3025-46 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 29460-1001 |
Browsing London shelves, Shelving location: Journal article Close shelf browser (Hides shelf browser)
| No cover image available | No cover image available | No cover image available | No cover image available | No cover image available | No cover image available | No cover image available | ||
| WB3025-35 Assignment | WB3025-36 Assignment and disclaimer | WB3025-45 Change of use | WB3025-46 Permitted development | WB3025-47 Post-enquiry evidence | WB3025-54 Parking facilities and VAT | WB3026-07 Assignee can sue builder |
"Peacock v SoS Environment and another" CA 14 June 1994. Replacement of a poultry house was not allowed as it would have been within 25m of a classified road and the development would be outside the exemptions under Town and Country Planning General Development Order 1988. The appellants` submission that the GDO created a presumption in favour of development was dismissed. The building of a poultry house did not come within permitted development.