*/
Town and country planning – Enforcement notice. The appellant appealed against an order dismissing: (i) his application to quash the decision of the inspector, appointed by the first respondent Secretary of State, to dismiss his appeal against the second respondent local authority's refusal to grant planning permission for the redevelopment of a site; and (ii) his appeal against the inspector's decision to dismiss his appeal against an enforcement notice issued by the authority in respect of the site and to uphold the notice with variations. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, held, inter alia, that two different versions of a plan had been produced by the appellant and by the authority before the inspector. Extrinsic evidence had plainly been admissible to resolve the factual issue as to which of the two plans had been referred to in the planning permission. As to the enforcement notice, there had been a legally defective variation notice which the authority had had the power to and had withdrawn and corrected before the appeal had been decided by the judge.
Town and country planning – Enforcement notice. The appellant appealed against an order dismissing: (i) his application to quash the decision of the inspector, appointed by the first respondent Secretary of State, to dismiss his appeal against the second respondent local authority's refusal to grant planning permission for the redevelopment of a site; and (ii) his appeal against the inspector's decision to dismiss his appeal against an enforcement notice issued by the authority in respect of the site and to uphold the notice with variations. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, held, inter alia, that two different versions of a plan had been produced by the appellant and by the authority before the inspector. Extrinsic evidence had plainly been admissible to resolve the factual issue as to which of the two plans had been referred to in the planning permission. As to the enforcement notice, there had been a legally defective variation notice which the authority had had the power to and had withdrawn and corrected before the appeal had been decided by the judge.
Chair of the Bar reports back
Marie Law, Director of Toxicology at AlphaBiolabs
A £500 donation from AlphaBiolabs has been made to the leading UK charity tackling international parental child abduction and the movement of children across international borders
Marie Law, Director of Toxicology at AlphaBiolabs, outlines the drug and alcohol testing options available for family law professionals, and how a new, free guide can help identify the most appropriate testing method for each specific case
By Louise Crush of Westgate Wealth Management
Marie Law, Director of Toxicology at AlphaBiolabs, examines the latest ONS data on drug misuse and its implications for toxicology testing in family law cases
A career shaped by advocacy beyond her practice, and the realities of living with an invisible disability – Dr Natasha Shotunde, Black Barristers’ Network Co-Founder and its Chair for seven years, reflects on a decade at the Bar
Responding to criticism on the narrow profile of government-instructed counsel, Mel Nebhrajani CB describes the system-wide change at GLD to drive fairer distribution of work and broader development of talent
The odds of success are as unforgiving as ever, but ambition clearly isn’t in short supply. David Wurtzel’s annual deep‑dive into the competition cohort shows who’s entering, who’s thriving and the trends that will define the next wave
Where to start and where to find help? Monisha Shah, Chair of the King’s Counsel Selection Panel, provides an overview of the silk selection process, debunking some myths along the way
Do chatbot providers owe a duty of care for negligent misstatements? Jasper Wong suggests that the principles applicable to humans should apply equally to machines
