Case summaries: 17 November 1997
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.The following notes of judgments were prepared by the reporters of the All England Law Reports.
Planning
R v Maldon District Council, ex p Pattani; QBD (Crown Office List) (Collins J) 16 Oct 1997.
Planning permission to develop a site as a supermarket carried with it permission to trade in anything which could ordinarily and properly be regarded as obtainable in a supermarket whose primary function was to sell food. Clear and unambiguous conditions should have been imposed if the permission was to exclude pharmaceutical services, and a pharmacy could, accordingly, be provided in the store.
Robin Barratt QC, Clive Lewis (Wollastons, Chelmsford) for the applicant; Duncan Ouseley QC, Jane Oldham (Berwin Leighton) for Tesco; Timothy Corner (Council Solicitor) for the council.
Disclosure
Saunders v Punch Ltd; ChD (Lindsay J) 9 October 1997.
Where an article was published relating to discussions between a client and his former solicitors the court, balancing the conflicting public interests of legal professional confidence and freedom of the press, was not satisfied that disclosure in the interests of justice was so pressing as to require the ban on disclosure to be overidden under s 10 of the Contempt of Court Act 1981.
John Martin QC, Thomas Lowe (D J Freeman) for the plaintiff; David Price (solicitor advocate) (David Price & Co) for the defendant.
Compulsory purchase
Halstead v Manchester City Council; CA (Nourse, Evans, Ward LJJ) 23 Oct 1997.
The statutory right to recover interest under s 11 of the Compulsory Purchase Act 1965 did not arise until the amount on which the interest became due was awarded or agreed, since that was the amount on which interest was payable, and the clear intention of the legislation was that the right to interest would compensate the claimant for non-payment during the intervening period.
Charles George QC, Peter Keenan (Brendan Rainsford, Manchester City Council) for the defendant; Andrew Gilbart QC, Mark Harper (Pannone & Partners, Manchester) for the plaintiff.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments