R v Hammersmith and Fulham LBC, re Beddowe`s application
Language: English Series: Rating & Valuation Reporter ; (1987) RVR 189-1099(11)Publication details: 1987Subject(s): Summary: CA 31 July 1987 Appeal against the dismissal of an application for judicial review for certiorari to quash a decision by the council authorising the borough valuer to conclude the sale of Block A of a block of flats known as Fulham Court to Barratt on terms which included restrictive covenants on blocks B-J of the same estate. These covenants would have restricted the use of the blocks to residential, and, with some exceptions, to long leases at minimum premiums of 10,000. CA first considered whether the transfer was a reasonable exercise of housing powers and decided that it was, on the ground that the policy had been honestly reached as a way of dealing with what had become a most difficult estate to manage in its unrepaired state. It then examined the argument that the scheme of covenants illegally fettered a future council`s power to deal with the estate and held that if a local authority acting in good faith in the proper and reasonable exercise of its powers undertakes some bin| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Law report | London Journal article | ABS38415 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 10404-1001 |
Browsing London shelves, Shelving location: Journal article Close shelf browser (Hides shelf browser)
CA 31 July 1987 Appeal against the dismissal of an application for judicial review for certiorari to quash a decision by the council authorising the borough valuer to conclude the sale of Block A of a block of flats known as Fulham Court to Barratt on terms which included restrictive covenants on blocks B-J of the same estate. These covenants would have restricted the use of the blocks to residential, and, with some exceptions, to long leases at minimum premiums of 10,000. CA first considered whether the transfer was a reasonable exercise of housing powers and decided that it was, on the ground that the policy had been honestly reached as a way of dealing with what had become a most difficult estate to manage in its unrepaired state. It then examined the argument that the scheme of covenants illegally fettered a future council`s power to deal with the estate and held that if a local authority acting in good faith in the proper and reasonable exercise of its powers undertakes some bin