Advert display
Language: English Series: Chartered Surveyor Weekly ; 35(9) 30 Nay 1991, 56(1)Publication details: 1991Subject(s): Summary: In Kingsley and another v Hammersmith and Fulham LBC , QBD 26 April 1991, it was held that the prosecuting function of a local authority to convict for the displaying of an advertising hoarding was not subject to Town and Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) Regulations 1989.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| News article | London News article | WB2721-34 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 60139-1001 |
Browsing London shelves, Shelving location: News article Close shelf browser (Hides shelf browser)
| 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 | ||
| WB2721-31 Lost exports | WB2721-32 Gypsies warning | WB2721-33 Local plans | WB2721-34 Advert display | WB2721-35 Development in the green belt | WB2721-36 75% of graduates face the dole | WB2721-37 Big brother looms into view |
In Kingsley and another v Hammersmith and Fulham LBC , QBD 26 April 1991, it was held that the prosecuting function of a local authority to convict for the displaying of an advertising hoarding was not subject to Town and Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) Regulations 1989.