Law Report: Case summaries 16 march 1998
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.
Confiscation order
R v City of London Justices, ex p Chapman; QBD (Div Ct)(Pill LJ, Gage J) 5 March 1998.
Since the scheme of the Drug Trafficking Offences Act 1986 was to make sentences in default to be served consecutively, where a judge had ordered that the time for payment of a confiscation order was to be the length of a defendant's prison sentence, the default sentence came into effect on the date on which the defendant was released on licence and not the date on which the sentence was due to be completed had there been no parole. This problem would be avoided by judges' stating a specific date by which payment was to be made when making confiscation orders under s 6(1) of the 1986 Act.
Timothy Sewell (Saunders & Co) for the applicant; Kennedy Talbot (Customs & Excise solicitor) for the interested party.
Planning
Snowdonia National Park Authority v Georgeson; QBD (Div Ct)(Pill LJ, Gage J) 9 March 1998.
Where a person had appealed to the Secretary of State against an enforcement notice under s 175(5) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, he could not, at the hearing of an information laid against him for failure to comply with that notice, claim that an alleged defect in its service rendered the enforcement notice invalid.
Andrew Thomas (Sharpe Pritchard & Co, for Conway Borough Council) for the appellant; the respondent did not appear and was not represented.
Torridge District Council v Jarrad; QBD (Div Ct)(Pill LJ, Gage J) 11 March 1998.
There was no room for the application of a defence under s171B(3) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 where an information had been laid alleging a breach of the Town and Country Planning (Control of Advertisement) Regulations 1992, since those regulations provided a code for the control of advertisements which did not depend on a breach of planning control under Part VII of the 1990 Act, and the defence in s171B(3) could only be used where the breach complained of was contained in that part of the Act.
Timothy Corner (Bazeley Barnes & Bazeley, Bideford) for the appellant; the respondent did not appear and was not represented.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments