Image from Google Jackets

Dunoon Developments v SoS for the Environment and Poole BC

Language: English Series: Property and Compensation Reports ; (1993) 65 PCR 101-107(4)Publication details: 1993Subject(s): Summary: CA 18 February 1992. In 1956 D`s predecessors were given planning permission to erect a building subject to a condition that the premises use was `limited to the display, sale and storage of new and used cars`. In 1990 D opened an indoor market. The council served an enforcement notice alleging breach of contract. D claimed that the activity was permitted by Class A of the General Development Order 1988. The council however claimed that the condition attached to the 1956 planning permission excluding the GDO. D appealed to the High Court under Town and Country Planning Act 1990 s289. This was allowed and the enforcement notice was quashed. The council appealed. CA dismissed the appeal on the grounds that the condition attached to the planning permission did not impliedly exclude the operation of the GDO. The use of the word `limited` in the condition was intended to assist in construing the condition not to exclude the GDO.
Holdings
Item type Current library Call number Copy number Status Barcode
Law report London Journal article ABS48300 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) 1 Available 66033-1001

CA 18 February 1992. In 1956 D`s predecessors were given planning permission to erect a building subject to a condition that the premises use was `limited to the display, sale and storage of new and used cars`. In 1990 D opened an indoor market. The council served an enforcement notice alleging breach of contract. D claimed that the activity was permitted by Class A of the General Development Order 1988. The council however claimed that the condition attached to the 1956 planning permission excluding the GDO. D appealed to the High Court under Town and Country Planning Act 1990 s289. This was allowed and the enforcement notice was quashed. The council appealed. CA dismissed the appeal on the grounds that the condition attached to the planning permission did not impliedly exclude the operation of the GDO. The use of the word `limited` in the condition was intended to assist in construing the condition not to exclude the GDO.