首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Planning & Environment Law >Bishop's Stortford Civic Federation v East Hertfordshire DC, Anley Trustees Ltd and Maison Anley Property Nominee Ltd
【24h】

Bishop's Stortford Civic Federation v East Hertfordshire DC, Anley Trustees Ltd and Maison Anley Property Nominee Ltd

机译:主教的斯托特福德市民联合会诉东赫特福德郡特区,安利信托公司和梅森·安利财产提名有限公司

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

47. For the reasons I have given I refuse judicial review of the Council's decision to grant planning permission. Nothing Cllr Tindale said flawed the decision of the committee in August 2011. The committee exercised its discretion in a perfectly proper manner. Failure to consult on the July 2012 documents Henderson submitted in the light of the NPPF constituted neither a breach of natural justice nor of the Environmental Impact Regulations. As a footnote I add this in fairness to Cllr Tindale. Ultimately he was found to be in technical breach of the Code of Conduct through his attendance and address to the planning committee in August 2011. For the reasons I have also given, a large question mark hangs over that finding.
机译:47.基于我给出的理由,我拒绝对安理会授予规划许可的决定进行司法审查。廷代尔(Cllr Tindale)表示,委员会在2011年8月的决定均无瑕疵。委员会以完全适当的方式行使其酌处权。未能参考2012年7月的NPPF提交的亨德森文件,既不违反自然正义,也不违反《环境影响条例》。作为一个脚注,我将此公平地添加到Cllr Tindale中。最终,通过出席会议并在2011年8月向计划委员会致词,他被发现在技术上违反了《行为准则》。出于我也给出的理由,该发现悬而未决。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号