Tyler v Avon CC
Language: English Series: Journal of Planning and Environment Law ; (1992) JPL 62-66(5)Publication details: 1992Subject(s): Summary: CA 26 June 1991. Protesting against the inclusion of his land in the green belt of a local plan, T took A to court and lost. However, the decision was reversed on appeal, where the inspector had construed the objection to refer only to T`s land, and thus by implication, included neighbouring plots in the plan by default. As the area concerned was of such a shape that all the plots would be affected either way by the decision, the inspector used the argument that the viability of the whole required the inclusion of the part. But, conversely, as T`s reasoning was accepted by the CA, the local plan had to be quashed for the entire area. The dangers of interpreting objections too narrowly are pointed out.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Law report | London Journal article | ABS45778 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 55008-1001 |
CA 26 June 1991. Protesting against the inclusion of his land in the green belt of a local plan, T took A to court and lost. However, the decision was reversed on appeal, where the inspector had construed the objection to refer only to T`s land, and thus by implication, included neighbouring plots in the plan by default. As the area concerned was of such a shape that all the plots would be affected either way by the decision, the inspector used the argument that the viability of the whole required the inclusion of the part. But, conversely, as T`s reasoning was accepted by the CA, the local plan had to be quashed for the entire area. The dangers of interpreting objections too narrowly are pointed out.