000 00858cab a2200193 4500
001 WB2411-11
008 090401t1988 xxu||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
035 _a(Sirsi) u59254
041 _aeng
245 _aTree order compensation
260 _c1988
350 _a0
490 _aTimes
_v11/3/88, p35
490 _aDaily Telegraph
_v11/3/88, p4(2)
520 _aIn Bell v Canterbury City Council , CD 10 March 1988, it was held that a landowner who had been refused permission on the ground of amenity to fell trees on woodlands subject to a tree preservation order was entitled to be compensated for the diminution in the value of the land resulting from the refusal and not merely for the commercial value of the timber which he could not realise. (See WB2409-19)
690 _aCONSERVATION AND THE ENVIRONMENT
942 _n0
948 _c04/03/1997
999 _c36337
_d36337