| 000 | 00929cam a2200229 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | ABS64941 | ||
| 008 | 011220n2001 000 0 eng u | ||
| 035 | _a(Sirsi) u116089 | ||
| 100 | _aRisso-Gill, J | ||
| 245 | _aRuling ripples | ||
| 260 | _c2001 | ||
| 490 |
_aHouseBuilder _v(60 no.11) December 2001, 27(1) |
||
| 520 | _aExamines the implications of a recent ruling at the high court. In R (on the application of JA Pye and Others) v Oxford City Council which revised the policy on supplementary planning guidance (SPG). This case was a challenge against the adoption of SPG and it failed but the case has important implications for future policy. | ||
| 590 | _aABS | ||
| 650 | _aSUPPLEMENTARY PLANNING GUIDANCE | ||
| 650 | _aLOCAL PLANNING AUTHORITY | ||
| 650 | _aDEVELOPMENT COSTS | ||
| 650 | _aTOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT 1990 | ||
| 650 | _aPPG12 | ||
| 690 |
_aPlanning and development _96259 |
||
| 942 | _n0 | ||
| 999 |
_c69154 _d69154 |
||