000			02136cam a2200229 4500
001			ABS66461
008			030307n2003 000 0 eng u
035			_a(Sirsi) u121574
245			_aHalliday v SoS Transport
260			_c2003
490			_aRating and Valuation Reporter _v[2003] RVR 12-15(4)
520			_aLT 24 January 2003. Claimant (H) served notice that a house she owned, six miles from Stansted Airport and 1.5 miles from the airport boundary, was blighted land within the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 Sched 13 para 1(b), having been affected by the government publication, "The future development of air transport in the United Kingdom". A counter notice was served on behalf of SoS Transport, objecting that no part of the property constituted blighted land; the objection was referred to LT. H had been trying to sell the property but was advised to drop the price by her agents after the report's publication, due to the fact that the property could be included in an action area if Stansted Airport was expanded. H also claimed that the blighting contravened the European Convention on Human Rights and breached her right to respect for private and family life, home and correspondence. "Held": H had failed to show the SoS's objection was not well founded and the objection should be upheld because there was nothing in the report to indicate that the house would be affected in any way. H could not invoke the convention rights as her circumstances fell far short of any that might involve such rights. View judgment at www.courtservice.gov.uk/tribunals/lands_frm.htm.
590			_aABS
650			_aHALLIDAY V SOS TRANSPORT (2002)
650			_aBLIGHT NOTICES
650			_aAIRPORT EXPANSION
650			_aTOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT 1990 SCHED 13 PARA 1(B)
650			_aHUMAN RIGHTS ACT 1998
690			_aENVIRONMENTAL AND LAND CONSULTANCY-PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT
856			_uhttps://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/markup.cgi?doc=/ew/cases/EWLands/2003/BNO_129_2002.html&query=Halliday+and+v+and+SoS+and+Transport&method=boolean _zView the judgment free of charge at www.bailii.org
942			_n0
999			_c72269 _d72269