Porter and another v SoS Transport

Language: English Series: Estates Gazette ; (1995) 33 EG 92-96 (5)Publication details: 1995Subject(s):

Summary: LT 6 January 1995. SoS Transport (X) acquired land from the claimants (P) for the construction of a bypass. P retained adjoining land. The SoS Environment granted a certificate of appropriate alternative development, reasoning that had the land not been acquired for the bypass it could have been residentially developed. X sought to adduce evidence that the conclusions of SoS Environment should not be considered when assessing compensation. P contended that X was precluded by the conditions of issue estoppel from reopening the issue determined by the certificate of alternative development. Decision in the claimants favour.

Holdings ( 1 )
Title notes ( 1 )

Holdings
Item type	Current library	Call number	Copy number	Status	Barcode
Law report	London Journal article	ABS53569 (Browse shelf(Opens below))	1	Available	5130-1001

Browsing London shelves, Shelving location: Journal article Close shelf browser (Hides shelf browser)

Previous	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	Next
Previous	ABS53566 Councils set for cash bonanza	ABS53567 Retail special report	ABS53568 The use of locational factors by tenants in shopping centre space selection	ABS53569 Porter and another v SoS Transport	ABS53570 Can joint ventures be marriages made in heaven?	ABS53571 Developers, property cycles and local economic development: the case of Sheffield	ABS53572 A facelift for competition	Next

LT 6 January 1995. SoS Transport (X) acquired land from the claimants (P) for the construction of a bypass. P retained adjoining land. The SoS Environment granted a certificate of appropriate alternative development, reasoning that had the land not been acquired for the bypass it could have been residentially developed. X sought to adduce evidence that the conclusions of SoS Environment should not be considered when assessing compensation. P contended that X was precluded by the conditions of issue estoppel from reopening the issue determined by the certificate of alternative development. Decision in the claimants favour.

Back to results

1 Affordable housing options
by Chapman, T
2 Housing targets in the firing line
by Minton, A
3 Canary Wharf tax break row

Print
Cite
Send to device
Save record
BIBTEX Dublin Core MARCXML MARC (non-Unicode/MARC-8) MARC (Unicode/UTF-8) MARC (Unicode/UTF-8, Standard) MODS (XML) RIS ISBD
More searches

Search for this title in:
Other Libraries (WorldCat) Other Databases (Google Scholar) Open Library (openlibrary.org)