R v Coventry City Council, ex parte Arrowcroft Group Plc
Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
Date | 2001 |
Court | Queen's Bench Division |
-
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
View this document and try vLex for 7 days - TRY VLEX
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
13 cases
-
The Queen (on the Application of Wet Finishing Works Ltd) v Taunton Deane Borough Council Strongvox Homes (Interested Party)
...increase what is permitted. 45 In my view, the true principle which governs section 73 cases is to be found in R v Coventry City Council, ex p. Arrowcroft Group plc [2001] PLCR 7, in which Sullivan J held that, under that section, a local planning authority: "is able to impose different con......
-
Justin Edward Pressland v The Council of the London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham
...73, it constitutes a new permission. It leaves the original permission unamended. Advantage can then be taken of either: see R v Coventry City Councilex p Arrowcroft Group Limited [2001] PLCR 7 per Sullivan J (as he then was) at [22]. 15 On September 11th 2015 the Council decided that the a......
-
R Susan Suliman v Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole Council
...amount to a fundamental alteration of the proposal put forward in the original application: see R v Coventry City Council ex p Arrowcroft [2001] PLCR 7 per Sullivan LJ at [29] and [33]; R (Wet Finishing Works Limited) v Taunton Deane District Council supra per Singh J at [42] and [45]–[48].......
-
R (on the application of Holborn Studios Ltd) v The Council of the London Borough of Hackney GHL (Eagle Wharf Road) Ltd (Interested Party)
...the sense that they do not amount to a fundamental alteration of the proposal put forward in the original application: see R v Coventry City Council ex p Arrowcroft [2001] PLCR 7 per Sullivan LJ at [29] and [33]; R (Wet Finishing Works Limited) v Taunton Deane District Council supra per Sin......
Request a trial to view additional results