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

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll