000			01612cab a2200241 4500
001			ABS59844
008			090401t1998 xxu||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
035			_a(Sirsi) u90483
041			_aeng
245			_aDilieto v Ealing LBC
260			_c1998
350			_a0
490			_aWeekly Law Reports _v[1998] 3 WLR 4 December 1998, 1403-1419(17)
520			_aQBD 2 April 1998. In 1964 the defendant D was granted planning permission for a warehouse subject to the condition that the yard was kept clear at all times. in 1994 a planning officer found that the yard was being used in breach of planning permission. Having failed to comply with a breach of condition notice the defendant was convicted, fined and ordered to pay costs. On appeal by way of case D contested that the breach of condition notice was invalid as the condition was so vague as to be a nullity and it had been served after the 10 year limitation period for enforcement had expired. The court allowed the appeal stating that the defendants contention of the notice being invalid due to being vague was unfounded but that he was entitled to contest it on the ground that it was out of time. The conviction, fines and order to pay costs were quashed, the case was remitted to the magistrates` courts for rehearing. Appeal allowed with costs.
650			_aBREACH OF CONDITION NOTICES
650			_aDILIETO V EALING LBC
650			_aFAILURE TO COMPLY
650			_aTOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT 1990 S171(B)(3)
650			_aVALIDITY OF NOTICE
690			_aPLANNING LAW AND PRACTICE-CASE LAW
942			_n0
948			_c23/12/1998
999			_c57373 _d57373