Town and country planning
Series: Estates Gazette Case Summaries ; [2001] EGCS 32(1) (17/03/01)Publication details: 2001Subject(s): Summary: "R v Lichfield DC and another ex p Lichfield Securities Ltd" CA 8 March 2001. The applicant, LS, obtained planning permission from LDC in 1996 to develop a part of Lichfield airfield knowing that the respondent W had also applied for permission to erect a food-processing unit and ancillary works on part of the same land. LDC granted planning permission for development of the food-processing unit and entered into a s106 agreement with LSS. W sought judicial review contending LDC had unfairly entered into the 106 agreement without allowing them make representations. The judge found that W could make further representation to LDC but refused relief on the grounds that the applicant's challenge to LDC's decision had not been made fast enough within the provisions of Ord 531 4(1).| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Law report | London News article | WB3712-27 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 111512-1001 |
"R v Lichfield DC and another ex p Lichfield Securities Ltd" CA 8 March 2001. The applicant, LS, obtained planning permission from LDC in 1996 to develop a part of Lichfield airfield knowing that the respondent W had also applied for permission to erect a food-processing unit and ancillary works on part of the same land. LDC granted planning permission for development of the food-processing unit and entered into a s106 agreement with LSS. W sought judicial review contending LDC had unfairly entered into the 106 agreement without allowing them make representations. The judge found that W could make further representation to LDC but refused relief on the grounds that the applicant's challenge to LDC's decision had not been made fast enough within the provisions of Ord 531 4(1).