Fox v Secretary of State for the Environment

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
Judgment Date25 June 1991
Date25 June 1991
CourtQueen's Bench Division

Queen's Bench Division

Fox and Others
and
Secretary of State for the Environment and Another

Compulsory purchase - compensation - existing planning policies

Time of policies

When considering an appeal against the issue of a certificate under section 17(4) of the Land Compensation Act 1961, the Secretary of State for the Environment should have looked at the planning policies and circumstances existing at the time of the notice to treat, which preceded the issue of a certificate, rather than at the time of the appeal.

Mr Justice Roch so held in a reserved judgment in the Queen's Bench Division on May 24 quashing the secretary of state's decision that a certificate issued by the second respondents, Surrey Heath Borough Council, be cancelled and a certificate with altered terms be issued. The matter was remitted to the secretary of state for reconsideration.

MR JUSTICE ROCH said that the secretary of state had said that in considering the applicants' appeal he had had to have regard to the relevant planning policies current and reasonably foreseeable at the date of the appeal.

However, in the view of the court that was a misdirection. The decision in Jelson Ltd v Minister of Housing and Local GovernmentELR ([1970] 1 QB 243) had not been overruled by Grampian Regional Council v Secretary of State for ScotlandWLR (...

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 cases
  • Hallam Land Management Limited V. The Scottish Ministers
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Session
    • 17 March 2009
    ...Grampian Regional Council v Secretary of State for ScotlandSC 1984 SC (HL) 1 considered. Fox v Secretary of State for the Environment (1991) 62 P&CR 459 considered. Fletcher Estates (Harlescott) Ltd v Secretary of State for the EnvironmentELR [2000] 2 AC 307 considered. South Lanarkshire Co......
  • Secretary of State for the Environment v Fletcher Estates (Harlescott) Ltd ; Newell and Others v Secretary of State for the Environment
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 11 June 1998
    ...of Jelson was reached, after a very careful review of arguments very similar to those advanced in our case, by Roch J in Fox v Secretary of State for the Environment (1991) 62 P&CR 459 at p 18The Secretary of State did however contend that there was an answer, or rather a series of related......
  • Hallam Land Management Ltd Against A Decision Of Scottish Minister
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Session
    • 19 April 2007
    ...authorities reference was made to Scunthorpe Borough Council v The Secretary of State 1997 JPL 653 and to Fox v The Secretary of State 1991 62 P & CR 459. These latter two cases, which were decisions at first instance, were presented to me as no more than illustrations of application of the......
  • Fletcher Estates (Harlescott) Ltd and Another v Secretary of State for the Environment and Another
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 10 June 1997
    ...resolve the issue before me. 31 Finally in this review of authorities, I should refer to Fox v Secretary of State for the Environment (1991) 62 P & CR 459, a decision of Roch J. The facts there were that in 1977 the applicants were refused planning permission to build houses on land that th......
1 books & journal articles
  • Congressional ethics and constituent advocacy in an age of mistrust.
    • United States
    • Michigan Law Review Vol. 95 No. 1, October - October 1996
    • 1 October 1996
    ...Political Reform 173-74 (4th ed. 1992); Schotland, supra note 252, at 452-56; Norman J. Ornstein, Reforming Campaign Reform, N.Y. Times, June 25, 1991, at A25 ("Virtually every academic expert on campaign finance dismisses limits as unfair impediments to unknown challengers seeking to unsea......

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