| 000 | 01097cab a2200217 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | X3270 | ||
| 008 | 090401t1996 xxu||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d | ||
| 035 | _a(Sirsi) u29552 | ||
| 041 | _aeng | ||
| 245 | _aManchester Ship Canal Co et al v SoS Environment | ||
| 260 | _c1996 | ||
| 350 | _a0 | ||
| 490 |
_aJournal of Planning and Environment Law _v1996 JPL 300-303(4) |
||
| 520 | _aHL 6 July 1995. Multipla representation in planning appeals. Issue of costs. Discretion of the court. Appeals by developer. SoS and development corporation successful. Entitlement to costs. SoS entitled to whole of his costs if successful. Developers requires a separate issue of interest before costs for separate representation allowed. Interests of developer and development corporation identiical. Third set of costs not justified. Second set of costs most likely to be awarded at first instance than in CA or HL (Headnote from journal) | ||
| 650 | _aCOSTS | ||
| 650 | _aMULTIPLE REPRESENTATION | ||
| 650 | _aPLANNING APPEALS | ||
| 690 | _aPLANNING LAW AND PRACTICE | ||
| 942 | _n0 | ||
| 948 | _c04/03/1997 | ||
| 999 |
_c19890 _d19890 |
||