| 000 | 01394cab a2200229 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | X1666 | ||
| 008 | 090401t1994 xxu||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d | ||
| 035 | _a(Sirsi) u18545 | ||
| 041 | _aeng | ||
| 245 | _aMcKay v Sos for the Environment, Cornwall CC and Penwith DC | ||
| 260 | _c1994 | ||
| 350 | _a0 | ||
| 490 |
_aJournal of Planning and Environment Law _v1994 JPL 806-816(11) |
||
| 520 | _aQBD 12 March 1994. Enforcement notice - steps required for compliance - part of site Scheduled Ancient Monument - allegation that notice was a nullity - requirement to carry out works in breach of Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act 1979 s2 - criminal liability - non compliance with notice also minimal - was Inspector entitled to vary the notice - test for nullity in Miller - Mead applied - recipient of the the notice must be able to understand with reasonable certainty the steps which are required of him. Also the steps must in reality be capable of being carried out and if the recipient is required to do something unlawful he cannot reasonably be said to be able to carry out the requirements - the notice was a nullity. | ||
| 650 | _aANCIENT MONUMENTS | ||
| 650 | _aANCIENT MONUMENTS AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL AREAS ACT 1979 | ||
| 650 | _aENFORCEMENT NOTICE | ||
| 650 | _aTEST FOR NULLITY | ||
| 690 | _aPLANNING LAW AND PRACTICE-CASE LAW | ||
| 942 | _n0 | ||
| 948 | _c04/03/1997 | ||
| 999 |
_c12334 _d12334 |
||