| 000 | 01080cab a2200253 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | WB2832-89 | ||
| 008 | 090401t1992 xxu||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d | ||
| 035 | _a(Sirsi) u1585 | ||
| 041 | _aeng | ||
| 245 | _aAlternative uses | ||
| 260 | _c1992 | ||
| 350 | _a0 | ||
| 490 |
_aEstates Gazette Case Summaries _v(1992) EGCS 111(1) (8/8/92) |
||
| 520 | _a"Bloomsbury & Islington Health Authority v SoS Environment and another" QBD 27 July 1992. In a planning appeal the appellants (B) claimed that the inspector refusing permission to redevelop St Peter`s Hospital had not applied the test of whether the council`s favoured alternative of residential conversion was practical and likely to arise in actuality. He was held not to have done so and the appeal, therefore, was allowed. | ||
| 650 | _aALTERNATIVE USES | ||
| 650 | _aCOVENT GARDEN | ||
| 650 | _aPLANNING APPLICATIONS | ||
| 650 | _aREFUSAL | ||
| 650 | _aST PETERS HOSPITAL | ||
| 650 | _aWESTMINSTER CC V BRITISH WATERWAYS BOARD | ||
| 690 | _aPLANNING LAW AND PRACTICE-CASE LAW | ||
| 942 | _n0 | ||
| 948 | _c04/03/1997 | ||
| 999 |
_c896 _d896 |
||