| 000 | 01329cab a22002295a 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | L144860 | ||
| 008 | 080814s2008 xxk f g 000 0 eng d | ||
| 035 | _a(Sirsi) u144860 | ||
| 041 | 0 | _aeng | |
| 100 | 1 | _aFindlay, James | |
| 245 | 0 | 0 | _aWhen does a tree preservation order protect? |
| 260 | _c2008 | ||
| 490 |
_aJournal of Planning and Environment Law _v(Issue 5) 2008, 615-618(4) |
||
| 520 | _aDiscusses the appeal that resulted after Perrin and another v Northampton BC (L142708), a case in which the verdict has subsequently been overturned. The authors look at the comments made by the appeal court judges in relation to exemptions under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. They also explore how the judges chose to define the term "nuisance" as used in the Act. Suggests that while there are still strong safeguards in place to prevent the destruction of protected trees, this does not mean that all cases will be treated in a similar manner and that each case should be judged on its relative merits. | ||
| 650 | 2 | 4 | _aPERRIN & RAMAGE V NORTHAMPTON BC |
| 650 | 2 | 4 | _aTOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT 1990 |
| 651 | 4 |
_aEngland and Wales _y1543- |
|
| 690 | _aENVIRONMENTAL AND LAND CONSULTANCY-PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT-DEVELOPMENT CONTROL | ||
| 700 | 1 | _aKohli, Ryan | |
| 700 | 1 | _aRicciardiello, Colin | |
| 942 | _n0 | ||
| 999 |
_c80618 _d80618 |
||