000			01972cam a2200289 4500
001			ABS68229
008			040907n2004 000 0 eng u
035			_a(Sirsi) u127280
245			_aAinsdale Investments Ltd v First Secretary of State and another
260			_c2004
490			_aEstates Gazette _v[2004] 35 EG 68-73(6)
520			_a[2004] EWHC 1010 (Admin), 14 May 2004. Claimant A was owner of property in Soho, London partly used for commercial purposes and partly used for residential. Second defendant Westminster City Council made a Compulsory Purchase Order (CPO) under the Housing Act 1985 s17 due to the poor state of the building which was confirmed by the first defendant S. A appealed on the grounds that s17 did not empower W to acquire commercial part of the building, the cpo had not been made as a last resort and there was no evidential basis concerning tenure problems of the residential part. A also claimed violation of its rights under the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms First Protocol Art 1. The two residents living in the residential part of the property also claimed a violation under Art 8. Application dismissed. Inclusion of the commercial part of the property was authorised by s17 of the 1985 Act. Claims for violation of the Convention were dismissed.
590			_aABS
590			_aABS
650			_aAINSDALE INVESTMENTS LTD V FIRST SECRETARY OF STATE AND ANOTHER
650			_aCOMPULSORY PURCHASE ORDERS
650			_aHOUSING ACT 1985 S17
650			_aMIXED-USE PROPERTY
650			_aCONVENTION FOR THE PROTECTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS AND FUNDAMENTAL FREEDOMS ART 1
650			_aCONVENTION FOR THE PROTECTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS AND FUNDAMENTAL FREEDOMS ART 8
650			_aPROPERTY-COMMERCIAL PROPERTY
650			_aRESIDENTIAL PROPERTY _96266
650			_aREPAIRS
650			_aFLYING FREEHOLD
690			_aCOMPULSORY PURCHASE AND COMPENSATION-CASE LAW
942			_n0
999			_c117963 _d117963