Aston Cantlow and Wilmcote with Billesley PCC v Wallbank and another
Series: Weekly Law Reports ; [2001] 3 WLR 1323-1338(15)Publication details: 2001Subject(s):- ASTON CANTLOW AND WILMCOTE WITH BILLESLEY PCC V WALLBANK AND ANOTHER
- CONVENTION FOR THE PROTECTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS AND FUNDAMENTAL FREEDOMS ART 6
- CONVENTION FOR THE PROTECTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS AND FUNDAMENTAL FREEDOMS ART 14
- HUMAN RIGHTS
- HUMAN RIGHTS ACT 1998
- PUBLIC AUTHORITIES
- REPAIRING LIABILITY
- TAX
- CHANCEL REPAIR LIABILITY
- CONVENTION FOR THE PROTECTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS AND FUNDAMENTAL FREEDOMS FIRST PROTOCOL ART 1
- PAROCHIAL CHURCH COUNCIL OF THE PARISH OF ASTON CANTLOW AND WILMCOTE WITH BILLESLEY WARWICKSHIRE V WALLBANK
- PROPERTY AND LAND LAW-CASE LAW
| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Law report | London Journal article | ABS64829 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 115844-1001 |
CA 17 May 2001. Appeal by the defendant (W) from the decision in favour of the claimants (A) on a preliminary issue regarding whether the alleged obligation of the defendants to carry out repairs to the chancel of a parish church contravened their rights under the European Convention of Human Rights. The defendants (W) were the freehold owners of former rectorial property under an inclosure award of 1743. In September 1994 the parochial church council served a notice under the Chancel Repairs Act 1932 s2(1) calling upon the defendants to repair the chancel. On appeal W contended that the PCC was a public authority within the Human Rights Act 1998 s6 and so it could not act incompatibly with the defendants' rights under the Convention; and the PPC's actions in trying to enforce the defendants' alleged liability were unlawful by reason of Protocol Art1 and/or Art.14 of the Convention. Appeal allowed. Copy of full judgement available on http://porch.ccta.gov.uk/courtser/judgements.nsf/Search/922B101EA4112A5680256A53004E8F7C?OpenDocument.