Image from Google Jackets

Babbage v North Norfolk DC

Language: English Series: Estates Gazette ; (1990) 13 EG 78-88(4)Publication details: 1990Subject(s): Summary: CA 26 July 1989. Appeal from a decision relating to the validity of a condition in a caravan site licence issued under Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960 . The greater part of the 8-acre site had, before the Act came into force, been used for caravans and deemed planning permission arises from s17 In October 1960 the owner applied for his licence and planning permission was deemed to be in existence. In 1961 this seems to have been overlooked when express consent was granted. However it seems to have been of no effect. A site licence was granted in 1971 which contained a condition limiting occupation from 20 March to 1 November. In 1987 the site owners (B) applied to vary the licence by exclusion of this condition. This was rejected. B appealed. Before the magistrates and divisional court the appeal failed. Before CA the argument turned on s5 of the Act which empowered a local authority to issue a site licence subject to a condition restricting the occasions on which c
Holdings
Item type Current library Call number Copy number Status Barcode
Law report London Journal article ABS42582 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) 1 Available 37694-1001

CA 26 July 1989. Appeal from a decision relating to the validity of a condition in a caravan site licence issued under Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960 . The greater part of the 8-acre site had, before the Act came into force, been used for caravans and deemed planning permission arises from s17 In October 1960 the owner applied for his licence and planning permission was deemed to be in existence. In 1961 this seems to have been overlooked when express consent was granted. However it seems to have been of no effect. A site licence was granted in 1971 which contained a condition limiting occupation from 20 March to 1 November. In 1987 the site owners (B) applied to vary the licence by exclusion of this condition. This was rejected. B appealed. Before the magistrates and divisional court the appeal failed. Before CA the argument turned on s5 of the Act which empowered a local authority to issue a site licence subject to a condition restricting the occasions on which c