header-logo header-logo

Every little helps

18 November 2011 / Keith Davies
Issue: 7490 / Categories: Features , Public , Property
printer mail-detail

Keith Davies reports on store wars in Wolverhampton

When a public body obtains a compulsory purchase order (CPO), its usual purpose involves development of the land purchased. Since the Revolution of 1689, and the Dockyards Act 1708, hundreds, if not thousands, of authorising Acts, have adorned the statute book. The advent of planning legislation in 1909 added planning control to compulsory acquisition, which can never of itself be an “acquisition for planning purposes”.

Three things need to be distinguished:

  • lawful purposes for which land may be acquired;
  • planning permission enabling any development to be carried out; and
  • lawful authorisation if particular land is to be purchased compulsorily.

These requirements are all public law and each public body concerned must be acting within its jurisdiction; if not, it will be vulnerable to judicial review proceedings.

If a local authority proposes to acquire land in its area “for planning purposes”, s 226 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (TCPA 1990) (replacing earlier statutes dating back to the wartime Town and Country Planning

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

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll