header-logo header-logo

20 June 2014
Issue: 7611 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Commons

R (on the application of Church Commissioners for England) v Hampshire County Council and another [2014] EWCA Civ 634, [2014] All ER (D) 60 (Jun)

If an application did not comply with the Commons (Registration of Town or Village Greens) (Interim Arrangements) (England) Regulations 2007 (SI 2007/457), reg 5(4) enabled the registration authority to reject it without going through the procedure of giving notice to the landowner and others. But if the registration authority thought that the applicant could correct the errors, it could give him a reasonable opportunity to do so. If within the reasonable opportunity so given the applicant corrected the errors, the original application had full force and effect and therefore the Regulation had to be retrospective. Accordingly, reg 5(4) of the Regulations provided a means for curing deficiencies in an application which did not provide all the statutory particulars, and, once an application was so cured, it was treated as duly made on the date on which the original defective application had been lodged. 

 

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

Ken Fowlie, chairman of Stowe Family Law, reflects on more than 30 years in legal services after ‘falling into law’

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Firm promotes senior associate and team leader as wills, trusts and probate team expands

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Manchester real estate finance practice welcomes legal director

NEWS
Children can claim for ‘lost years’ damages in personal injury cases, the Supreme Court has held in a landmark judgment
The Supreme Court has drawn a firm line under branding creativity in regulated markets. In Dairy UK Ltd v Oatly AB, it ruled that Oatly’s ‘post-milk generation’ trade mark unlawfully deployed a protected dairy designation. In NLJ this week, Asima Rana of DWF explains that the court prioritised ‘regulatory clarity over creative branding choices’, holding that ‘designation’ extends beyond product names to marketing slogans
From cat fouling to Part 36 brinkmanship, the latest 'Civil way' round-up is a reminder that procedural skirmishes can have sharp teeth. NLJ columnist Stephen Gold ranges across recent decisions with his customary wit
Digital loot may feel like property, but civil law is not always convinced. In NLJ this week, Paul Schwartfeger of 36 Stone and Nadia Latti of CMS examine fraud involving platform-controlled digital assets, from ‘account takeover and asset stripping’ to ‘value laundering’
Lasting powers of attorney (LPAs) are not ‘set and forget’ documents. In this week's NLJ, Ann Stanyer of Wedlake Bell urges practitioners to review LPAs every five years and after major life changes
back-to-top-scroll