000			01747cab a2200217 4500
001			ABS67357
008			040105n2003 000 0 eng u
035			_a(Sirsi) u124699
100			_aWinter, P.
245		2	_aA new era for developers and planning authorities?
260			_c2003
490			_aTown & Country Planning _v72(11) December 2003, 350-352(3)
520			_aThe first in a series of four articles which examine the courts' approach to macro-political decision-making where the human rights, amenity and the general environment of the community may be directly affected. Article one looks at how decisions can be challenged in the courts by applying for judicial review which in the context of the planning system is mainly used by aggrieved third parties seeking to quash planning permissions which have been granted by local planning authorities. Stringent time limits for applying for judicial review based on the principle of the six week rule between the date of the decision and the application were abolished by "R v Hammersmith and Fulham LBC ex p Burkett" ([2003] UKHL 23, Abs66375). Since the "Burkett" decision, the courts have recognised that greater caution will be needed in handling the issue of promptness. It is suggested that local planning authorities will ensure that s106 agreements are fully drafted before the matter is reported to committee. Concludes that "Burkett" will lead to an increase in the number of judicial review decisions being made.
590			_aABS
650			_aR V HAMMERSMITH AND FULHAM LBC EX P BURKETT
650			_aJUDICIAL REVIEW
650			_aPLANNING DECISIONS
650			_aTIME LIMITS
690			_aENVIRONMENTAL AND LAND CONSULTANCY-PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT
942			_n0
999			_c74006 _d74006