Carrel v London Underground Ltd
Language: English Series: Rating & Valuation Reporter ; 1996 RVR 234-240(7)Publication details: 1996Subject(s): Summary: LT 8 February 1995. To determine three preliminary points of law following a notice served by claimant (C) under Town and Country Planning Act 1990 s151(1). Firstly, whether the sale of C`s interest subsequent to the service by him of a blight notice constituted a deemed withdrawal of a blight notice, secondly, with regard to the fact that at the time of service of the blight notice C`s interest was blighted by reason of the then proposed line of railway work and/or the safeguarding directive, the blight notice should have been accepted and thirdly, whether the claimant would be compensated and by whom and for what. LT had no jurisdiction to proceed and C was not entitled to compensation. (Addendum date for awarding of costs 19 April 1995 see 1996 12 EG 129-134).| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Law report | London Journal article | ABS54304 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 9689-1001 |
LT 8 February 1995. To determine three preliminary points of law following a notice served by claimant (C) under Town and Country Planning Act 1990 s151(1). Firstly, whether the sale of C`s interest subsequent to the service by him of a blight notice constituted a deemed withdrawal of a blight notice, secondly, with regard to the fact that at the time of service of the blight notice C`s interest was blighted by reason of the then proposed line of railway work and/or the safeguarding directive, the blight notice should have been accepted and thirdly, whether the claimant would be compensated and by whom and for what. LT had no jurisdiction to proceed and C was not entitled to compensation. (Addendum date for awarding of costs 19 April 1995 see 1996 12 EG 129-134).