Demolition in UK Law

  • Fairmount Investments Ltd v Secretary of State for the Environment
    • House of Lords
    • 24 Jun 1976
    ...... At the inquiry the appellants put forward two contentions, first that the houses were not unfit, and, secondly, that if they were, their demolition was not the best way of dealing with the conditions in the area as they were capable of rehabilitation. They put forward proposals for that directed ......
  • Re Stalybridge and Compulsory Purchase Order, 1963; Ashbridge Investments Ltd v Minister of Housing and Local Government
    • Court of Appeal
    • 02 Jul 1965
  • Almond v Ash Brothers & Heaton Ltd ; Dawkins (Valuation Officer) v Ash Bros & Heaton Ltd
    • House of Lords
    • 26 Mar 1969
    ......It is, shortly stated, whether the prospect of an early demolition of premises by a local authority is a relevant factor to be taken into consideration in assessing the rateable value of the property. . ......
  • Hillingdon London Borough Council v Cutler
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 13 Mar 1967
    ...... the subject of appeal) in which the local authority sued the defendant in the County Court for certain expenses arising (they said) under demolition orders which they had made against buildings on property of the defendant's. This property appears to have been a considerable 18th-century house ......
  • Elliott v Southwark London Borough Council
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 24 Feb 1976
    ...... background to the appeal is the introduction by legislation in 1974 of the concept of the rehabilitation of houses as an alternative to demolition, clearance and redevelopment. The relevant statutory provisions are the Housing Act, 1974, section 114, and the 10th Schedule to that Act as amended ......
  • R v Bristol Corpn.ex parte Hendy
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 01 Nov 1973
  • Davy v Leeds Corporation
    • House of Lords
    • 24 Feb 1965
    ...... 14 The Lands Tribunal accepted the contention advanced by Mr. Bridge that this section was irrelevant since, they said, "'demolition' which is all that a clearance area declaration requires, is not 'development' for the purposes of the Act", Mr. Layfield, for the Respondents, had ......
  • Davy v Leeds Corporation
    • Court of Appeal
    • 29 Jun 1964
    ......But they were under a serious misapprehension which vitiates much of their reasoning. They thought that demolition was not "development" for the purposes of Section 9 of the Act, whereas it is so. That appears from the last two lines of sub-section (8). The ......
  • Canterbury City Council v Colley and Another
    • House of Lords
    • 21 Jan 1993
    ...... outline planning permission had been granted on 15 November 1961 by the Kent County Council, then the local planning authority, for "the demolition of house and erection of new dwelling". Following that permission, the house originally standing on the property was demolished in September 1963 but ......
  • Smith v Giuliani
    • House of Lords
    • 25 May 1925
    ...... cited, but as it appeared that the menace to the public safety would be remove, if part only of the building was taken away, the order for demolition was confined to that part alone. The question is whether in these circumstances the word "proprietor" applies only to the proprietors of that part of ......
  • See all results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT