header-logo header-logo

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

Every little helps

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

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans appoint new Chief Technology Officer

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya announces trainee retention rate of 86%

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers welcomes two new Graduate Solicitor Apprentices

NEWS
LexisNexis is delighted to announce the launch of the LexisNexis Legal Awards 2027, celebrating outstanding achievement, innovation and impact across the legal profession
The Legal Services Board (LSB) is to take further enforcement action against the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), setting additional performance targets and ‘intensifying’ its oversight, it has said
Regulators missed several opportunities to intervene in PM Law Group before it collapsed, an independent review by City firm Jenner & Block has found
An employer’s vicarious liability for the alleged torts of an employee cannot be transferred by TUPE, the Court of Appeal has confirmed
Tiered fees of up to £1,500 for Legal Ombudsman (LeO) cases could leave firms with little option but to pay out, lawyers have warned
back-to-top-scroll