In re Caton and another's application.
Series: Estates Gazette ; [1999] 38 EG 193-199(3)Publication details: 1999Subject(s): Summary: LT 5 August 1999. The applicants (C) were the freehold owners of a golf course in the green belt. In October 1990 they entered into an agreement with Rochdale DC, under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 s106, which restricted the use of the dining room and lounge by non-members to no more than two days and week and 52 days a year. C sought to extend this to three days a week, relying on obsoleteness. Held, application refused. Where a restriction under s106 was imposed to implement planning policy, planning policy would have to change to the extent that it would no longer justify the restriction in order for the restriction to be obsolete, and this was not the case.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Journal article | London Journal article | ABS61262 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 101881-1001 |
LT 5 August 1999. The applicants (C) were the freehold owners of a golf course in the green belt. In October 1990 they entered into an agreement with Rochdale DC, under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 s106, which restricted the use of the dining room and lounge by non-members to no more than two days and week and 52 days a year. C sought to extend this to three days a week, relying on obsoleteness. Held, application refused. Where a restriction under s106 was imposed to implement planning policy, planning policy would have to change to the extent that it would no longer justify the restriction in order for the restriction to be obsolete, and this was not the case.