18th April 2009, 11:19 AM
PeterAF said:
"They could put it up as policy but it would fall because it is not lawful"
I am not sure you are right, Peter, about this. I think it hangs on what PPG 16 says (which is not law) and thus a local plan could have a policy or a statement clarifying what they mean by suitablely qualified. I think the issue in law would be at an enforcement prosecution would employing a good organisation who is not a RAO do building recording would the defence of de minimus hold up.
The judge would have to rely on an expert witness to say if the work was up to standard or not. If the work was upto standard the prosecution must fall because the intent of the policy had been followed.
A unilateral obligation could be used in this way and indeed I have used a S106 to achieve a similar thing.
Peter Wardle
(I will continue this tomorrow I have to go to an open day today)
"They could put it up as policy but it would fall because it is not lawful"
I am not sure you are right, Peter, about this. I think it hangs on what PPG 16 says (which is not law) and thus a local plan could have a policy or a statement clarifying what they mean by suitablely qualified. I think the issue in law would be at an enforcement prosecution would employing a good organisation who is not a RAO do building recording would the defence of de minimus hold up.
The judge would have to rely on an expert witness to say if the work was up to standard or not. If the work was upto standard the prosecution must fall because the intent of the policy had been followed.
A unilateral obligation could be used in this way and indeed I have used a S106 to achieve a similar thing.
Peter Wardle
(I will continue this tomorrow I have to go to an open day today)