Conservation area
Language: English Series: Estates Gazette Case Summaries ; 1992 EGCS 23(2) (29 February 1992)Publication details: 1992Subject(s): Summary: "R v Canterbury CC ex parte Halford" QBD 18 February 1992. An application for judicial review on the designation of a conservation area. The orginal designation had been made in 1971. In 1991 the council (C) had enlarged the designated area to include the applicant owner (H)`s land. H argued that C had acted unlawfully on the grounds that a conservation area must have a feature of architectural and historical interest, the character and appearance of which it is desirable to preserve or enhance under Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 s69. C argued that a setting is part of the character. As there is no statutory redress for challenging the legality of a designation, application for judicial review allowed.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Law report | London Journal article | WB2810-41 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 49810-1001 |
"R v Canterbury CC ex parte Halford" QBD 18 February 1992. An application for judicial review on the designation of a conservation area. The orginal designation had been made in 1971. In 1991 the council (C) had enlarged the designated area to include the applicant owner (H)`s land. H argued that C had acted unlawfully on the grounds that a conservation area must have a feature of architectural and historical interest, the character and appearance of which it is desirable to preserve or enhance under Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 s69. C argued that a setting is part of the character. As there is no statutory redress for challenging the legality of a designation, application for judicial review allowed.