Carpets of Worth Ltd v Wyre Forest DC
Language: English Series: Property and Compensation Reports ; (1991) 62 P&CR 334-349(8)Publication details: 1991Subject(s): Summary: CA 12 March 1991. C owned 20 acres of land, the southern section being occupied by a factory and the northern by open land. In 1985 the Hereford and Worcester Structure Plan was approved showing the general position of green belt. In 1986 C`s northern land was included in local plan proposals at the request of the county council. Boundaries of the green belt were therefore altered. C`s objection at the local plan inquiry was rejected and the plan was adopted. C appealed on the ground that ministerial policy in planning guidelines and circulars, particularly DoE Circular 14/84 para 3(a) which stated that green belt boundaries should only be altered in exceptional circumstances, had not been adequately considered and applied. The council contended that alterations to the green belt, which had the effect of extending rather than reducing it, did not require such justification. Appeal allowed on the grounds that although ministerial circulars and PPG had no formal statutory force the loc| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Law report | London Journal article | ABS45332 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 52390-1001 |
CA 12 March 1991. C owned 20 acres of land, the southern section being occupied by a factory and the northern by open land. In 1985 the Hereford and Worcester Structure Plan was approved showing the general position of green belt. In 1986 C`s northern land was included in local plan proposals at the request of the county council. Boundaries of the green belt were therefore altered. C`s objection at the local plan inquiry was rejected and the plan was adopted. C appealed on the ground that ministerial policy in planning guidelines and circulars, particularly DoE Circular 14/84 para 3(a) which stated that green belt boundaries should only be altered in exceptional circumstances, had not been adequately considered and applied. The council contended that alterations to the green belt, which had the effect of extending rather than reducing it, did not require such justification. Appeal allowed on the grounds that although ministerial circulars and PPG had no formal statutory force the loc