||All England Reporter
|| All ER (D) 94 (May)
||Christopher Katkowski QC and Tim Buley (instructed by Burges Salmon) for the claimants.
||Reuben Taylor (instructed by Mike Dikens) for the defendant.
||9 May 2005
Town and country planning - Development - Permitted development - Telecommunications - Conservation area designation - Effect on development within area - Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995, , art 4.
The local planning authority had erred in law and had adopted the wrong procedure by withdrawing varied enforcement notices on the ground that the site of the claimants' development had been included within a conservation area and that therefore from that date the development fell within the description of development not permitted under Pt 24 by virtue of paraA.1(i) of Pt 24 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995, . Under art4 of the 1995 Order the correct procedure for the authority, where it was satisfied that it was expedient that the development described should not be carried out unless permission was granted for it on an application, would be to give a direction that the permission granted should not apply.
- The All England Law Reports comprises judgments with headnotes and catchwords indicating the area of law and key issues of the case prepared by legally qualified editorsFind AllER Reports
- Cases related to this particular case that are related to, or discuss this caseView related cases
- Commentary discussing this particular case from LexisLibrary's comprehensive range of titles including Butterworths, Halsbury's and TolleyView related commentary