| 000 | 00985cab a2200229 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | ABS53112 | ||
| 008 | 090401t1995 xxu||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d | ||
| 035 | _a(Sirsi) u2168 | ||
| 041 | _aeng | ||
| 100 | _aEdwards, M. | ||
| 245 | _aLegality of related development | ||
| 260 | _c1995 | ||
| 350 | _a0 | ||
| 490 |
_aEstates Gazette _v(9424) 17 June 1995, 144-5(2) |
||
| 520 | _aReviews the decision in "R v South Northamptonshire DC, ex p Crest Homes" in the light of the "Tesco Witney" case, which cites the "Crest Homes" case as being a good example of the application of the principle set out in DoE Circular 16/91 that planning obligations might properly be used to require developers to meet or contribute to the external costs of the development. | ||
| 650 | _aINFRASTRUCTURE COSTS | ||
| 650 | _aPLANNING OBLIGATIONS | ||
| 650 | _aR V SOUTH NORTHAMPTONSHIRE DC AND OTHERS EX P CREST HOMES PLC | ||
| 690 | _aPLANNING LAW AND PRACTICE | ||
| 942 | _n0 | ||
| 948 | _c04/03/1997 | ||
| 999 |
_c1307 _d1307 |
||