DOCSLIB.ORG

[Coat of Arms] the Law Commission

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
[Coat of Arms] the Law Commission [Coat of Arms] The Law Commission (LAW COM No 286) TOWARDS A COMPULSORY PURCHASE CODE: (1) COMPENSATION FINAL REPORT Report on a reference under section 3(1)(e) of the Law Commissions Act 1965 Presented to the Parliament of the United Kingdom by the Lord High Chancellor by Command of Her Majesty December 2003 Cm 6071 £xx.xx The Law Commission was set up by the Law Commissions Act 1965 for the purpose of promoting the reform of the law. The Law Commissioners are: The Honourable Mr Justice Toulson, Chairman Professor Hugh Beale QC Mr Stuart Bridge Professor Martin Partington CBE Judge Alan Wilkie QC The Chief Executive of the Law Commission is Mr Michael Sayers and its offices are at Conquest House, 37-38 John Street, Theobalds Road, London WC1N 2BQ. The terms of this report were agreed on 5 November 2003. The text of this report is available on the Internet at: http://www.lawcom.gov.uk ii THE LAW COMMISSION TOWARDS A COMPULSORY PURCHASE CODE – (1) COMPENSATION FINAL REPORT CONTENTS Paragraph Page ABBREVIATIONS xi EXECUTIVE SUMMARY xiii PART I: INTRODUCTION 1 Terms of reference 1.1 1 Background to this Report 1.2 2 The existing law 1.2 2 CPPRAG Review 1.3 2 Work since the CPPRAG Review 1.6 3 Government policy 1.13 4 Planning and Compulsory Purchase Bill 2002/03 1.18 6 The Law Commission’s approach 1.26 7 Sorting out the law 1.29 8 Policy framework 1.30 8 Preserving the balance 1.31 8 No draft Bill 1.35 10 Outline of the Compensation Code 1.37 10 Acknowledgements 1.44 11 PART II: RIGHT TO COMPENSATION 12 The right to compensation 2.1 12 Introduction 2.1 12 Extent of the right 2.1 12 Date for identification of interests 2.2 12 “Qualifying interests” 2.6 13 Consultation 2.7 14 Rule 1 2.8 14 Basis of compensation 2.9 14 Introduction 2.9 14 Consultation 2.14 16 iii Paragraph Page Structure of the Code 2.18 17 Rule 2 2.21 18 PART III: THE COMPENSATION CODE – HEADS A AND B 19 Head A: Market value 3.1 19 Introduction 3.1 19 Consultation 3.3 19 Willing buyer 3.4 19 Not less than nil 3.9 21 Rule 3 3.12 21 Head B: Injury to retained land 3.13 22 Introduction 3.13 22 Severance and injurious affection 3.13 22 Betterment 3.16 24 Other valuation rules 3.18 24 Consultation 3.20 25 Market value only? 3.20 25 Use of hindsight 3.25 26 “Before and after” 3.30 28 Betterment 3.31 28 Definition of retained land 3.32 28 Contractors’ negligence 3.33 28 Other points 3.34 29 Rule 4 3.35 29 PART IV: THE COMPENSATION CODE – HEADS C AND D 31 Head C: Consequential loss 4.1 31 Introduction 4.1 31 Existing law 4.1 31 Consultation proposals 4.3 32 “Disturbance” or “consequential loss” 4.4 32 The Wrexham case 4.8 33 The Dublin case 4.12 35 Comments 4.15 36 Particular issues 4.18 38 Wording of the general rule 4.20 38 Personal circumstances and mitigation 4.27 40 Relocation versus extinguishment 4.31 40 Replacement of buildings 4.39 43 iv Paragraph Page Starting date for disturbance compensation 4.40 44 Rule 5 4.42 45 Head D: Equivalent reinstatement 4.43 48 Introduction 4.43 48 Consultation 4.46 49 Rule 6 4.53 52 PART V: THE COMPENSATION CODE – GENERAL RULES 54 Introduction 5.1 54 Prospects of lease renewal 5.2 54 Rehousing obligations 5.9 56 Illegal uses 5.10 56 The scope of the rule 5.10 56 Consultation 5.13 57 Rule 7 5.18 58 New interests and enhancements 5.19 59 Consistency 5.20 59 Rule 8 5.23 60 Mitigation 5.24 60 Rule 9 5.26 60 PART VI: VALUATION DATE AND DISREGARDS 61 Fixing the valuation date 6.1 61 Introduction 6.1 61 Valuation of interests in land 6.1 61 Consequential loss 6.3 62 Equivalent reinstatement 6.5 62 Facts known to the tribunal 6.6 62 Consultation 6.7 63 Rule 10 6.7 63 Disregards 6.8 64 Introduction 6.8 64 New interests and enhancements 6.9 64 Rule 11 6.12 64 Rehousing obligations 6.13 65 Introduction 6.13 65 Discussion 6.16 65 Rule 12 6.18 65 v Paragraph Page PART VII: STATUTORY PROJECTS – PROBLEMS AND SOLUTIONS 67 Introduction 7.1 67 The no-scheme rule 7.1 67 Clearing the decks 7.4 68 The policy rationale 7.7 69 The new code – principles 7.9 71 General approach 7.9 71 Principal features of the new Code 7.12 72 Key elements retained 7.12 72 Main problems of the existing law 7.13 72 Main changes 7.14 73 Consultation 7.15 74 The statutory project rule 7.16 75 Preferred version of the rule 7.16 75 Depreciation due to planning blight 7.19 76 Commercial interests 7.22 76 Defining the project 7.26 77 The cancellation assumption 7.29 78 Ransom strips 7.34 80 Special statutory designations 7.38 82 Blight and purchase notices 7.44 84 Other heads of compensation 7.46 85 Injury to retained land 7.46 85 Consequential loss 7.48 86 Planning status 7.50 87 Consultation paper 7.50 87 Responses 7.53 88 Area of planning assumptions 7.55 89 Assumed permission for the authority’s development 7.56 89 Appeal against certificate of alternative development 7.59 90 PART VIII: STATUTORY PROJECT AND PLANNING STATUS – THE NEW CODE 92 Introduction 8.1 92 The new Rules 8.3 92 The new Rules annotated 8.4 96 13 The statutory project and blight 8.4 96 13A Other heads of compensation 8.19 104 14 Planning status 8.23 106 14A Alternative development certificate 8.27 108 vi Paragraph Page Provisions not replaced 8.32 110 Third schedule rights 8.32 110 Subsequent planning permissions 8.35 111 Rule 15 8.39 112 PART IX: PARTICULAR INTERESTS 113 Acquisition of new rights 9.1 113 Rule 16 9.5 114 Interference with rights 9.6 114 Introduction 9.6 114 Consultation 9.10 116 Rule 17 9.12 116 Compensation for minor tenancies 9.13 117 Introduction 9.13 117 Rule 18 9.17 118 PART X: INCIDENTAL MATTERS 119 Advance payments 10.1 119 Introduction 10.1 119 Consultation 10.5 119 Rule 19 10.9 121 Lands Tribunal jurisdiction 10.10 122 Rule 20 10.11 122 Interest 10.12 122 Existing law 10.12 122 Date from which interest runs 10.12 122 Amount of interest 10.15 123 Commentary in the consultation paper 10.16 124 Consultation 10.20 125 Date from which interest runs 10.20 125 Amount of interest 10.22 126 Finance costs 10.25 127 Professional fees 10.27 127 Rule 21 10.28 127 PART XI: COMPENSATION WHERE NO LAND IS ACQUIRED 129 Compensation for depreciation caused by public works 11.1 129 Introduction 11.1 129 Existing law 11.3 129 Section 10 of the 1965 Act: injurious affection due to the vii Paragraph Page construction of public works 11.4 130 Part I of the 1973 Act: injurious affection due to the use of public works 11.8 133 Consultation proposals 11.11 134 Consultation 11.15 136 Conclusion 11.19 137 Recommendation 11.23 139 PART XII: COMPENSATION FOR COMPULSORY PURCHASE – FRAMEWORK FOR A CODE 140 Compensation – standard provisions 140 General rules 144 Valuation date 145 Matters to be disregarded 145 Planning status 148 Particular interests 150 Incidental matters 150 Compensation where no land is acquired 151 APPENDIX A: THE IMPACT OF OUR RECOMMENDATIONS 153 APPENDIX B: REPEALS 156 APPENDIX C: THE DEVELOPMENT OF COMPULSORY PURCHASE LAW 159 Introduction C.1 159 Historical context C.2 159 The 1845 Act C.2 159 The Scott Committee and the 1919 Act C.5 160 From 1945 to 1961 C.7 161 From 1961 until today C.12 163 Towards privatisation C.12 163 Legislative change C.15 163 The Human Rights Act C.18 165 The law today C.24 166 Sources of the current law C.25 166 (1) Powers of compulsory purchase C.26 167 (2) Making and authorisation C.29 168 (3) Implementation C.31 169 viii Paragraph Page (4) Determination of compensation C.34 169 (5) Compensation rules C.35 170 APPENDIX D: THE NO-SCHEME RULE – HISTORY 171 Introduction D.1 171 The “no-scheme rule” D.1 171 Three phases of evolution D.5 172 Phase (1): from 1845 to 1919 D.6 172 The early cases D.6 172 Value to the owner D.6 172 Special adaptability D.8 172 Special purchaser D.11 174 From Lucas to Fraser D.13 174 The English cases D.14 174 The Canadian cases D.23 178 The Scott Committee D.30 180 Phase (2): from 1919 to 1959 D.34 182 The Indian case (1939) D.34 182 The Pointe Gourde case D.39 184 The importance of Pointe Gourde D.43 185 From the 1947 Act to 1959 D.48 186 The 1947 Act D.48 186 Case law D.50 187 Phase (3): Modern development D.53 188 The Town and County Planning Act 1959 D.53 188 Government explanations D.55 188 The Land Compensation Act 1961 D.57 189 Section 6 and the no-scheme rule D.58 189 Planning assumptions D.63 189 The no-scheme rule in the Courts D.66 192 (1) Assimilation of the judicial and statutory versions D.68 193 (2) Judicial evolution D.73 195 (3) The no-scheme world D.78 198 (4) Decreases in value due to the scheme D.82 199 (5) A valuation tool only D.84 200 (6) The Indian case D.87 201 Particular issues D.92 202 (1) Limits of rule (3) D.93 203 (2) Planning assumptions D.98 204 (3) Ransom strips D.106 208 (4) Disturbance D.110 209 (5) Purchase notices D.112 210 ix Paragraph Page International comparisons D.113 210 Commonwealth D.113 210 Australia D.114 211 Canada D.118 212 South Africa D.120 213 Other jurisdictions D.122 214 California D.122 214 France D.126 215 Conclusion on international comparisons D.127 215 Conclusion – the no-scheme rule today D.128 215 Postscript – the Pentrehobyn case D.136 218 A textbook example D.136 218 Facts D.137 218 Conclusion D.143 220 APPENDIX E: RESPONDENTS TO CP 165 221 x ABBREVIATIONS the 1961 Act Land Compensation Act 1961 the 1965 Act Compulsory Purchase Act 1965 the 1973 Act Land Compensation Act 1973 the 1981 Act Acquisition of Land Act 1981 the 1990 Act Town and Country Planning Act 1990 the ALRC Report The Australian Law Reform Commission Report No 14: Lands Acquisition and Compensation (1980) CP 165 Towards a Compulsory Purchase Code (1): Compensation (2002) Consultation Paper No 165 CP 169
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Aberdeen Student Law Review
    Aberdeen Student Law Review With thanks to our sponsors Stronachs LLP July 2011 Volume 2 www.abdn.ac.uk/law/aslr THE EDITORIAL BOARD 2010 - 2011 Managing Editor Leanne Bain Editors Alice Cannon Ross Douglas Emma Fraser Stuart Lee Bruce Mangeon Fairweather Charlotte Taylor Ryan T. Whelan Jennifer White FOREWORD BY THE HON . LORD WOOLMAN SENATOR OF THE COLLEGE OF JUSTICE Has the ASLR already reached its second volume? I am delighted that the brio of those involved in launching the project has been sustained. That is evident from the table of contents for the new volume. The topics range across legal history, oil and gas law and the law of evidence. In my view, volume two confirms that the ASLR is continuing to make a significant contribution to legal learning in Scotland. Stephen Woolman July 2011 INTRODUCTION TO VOLUME TWO In 1987 Professor Erwin N Griswold, former Dean of Harvard Law School, gave an insight into the history of the Harvard Law Review, the oldest student-led law review in the world. He acknowledged: Some people are concerned that a major legal periodical in the United States is edited and managed by students. It is an unusual situation, but it started that way, and it developed mightily from its own strength.1 I firmly believe in the strength of the student law review, and it is this belief that has shaped the endeavours of the editorial team during the past year The second year of a professional publication can be as difficult as the first, and this year has certainly not been without challenge.
    [Show full text]
  • Guide for the Disposal of Surplus Land
    Guide for the Disposal of Surplus Land March 2017 1 © Crown copyright 2013 Produced by Cabinet Office You may re-use this information (excluding logos) free of charge in any format or medium, under the terms of the Open Government Licence. To view this licence, visit http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/ or email: [email protected] Where we have identified any third party copyright material you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned. Alternative format versions of this report are available on request from Government Property Unit 4th Floor, Red Zone 1 Horse Guards Road London [email protected]. 2 Contents 1.0 Introduction and Purpose of the Guide 1.1 Introduction 1.2 Policy and Drivers 2.0 Identifying Surplus Land 2.1 Strategic Asset Management 2.2 Identifying Surplus Land 2.3 Listing Land as Surplus 3.0 Disposal Options and Monitoring 3.1 National Property Controls - Approval to Dispose 3.2 Considerations for the Disposal of Surplus Land 3.3 Disposals Monitoring and Performance Reporting 4.0 Open Market Sale 4.1 Preparing for Disposal 4.2 Accelerating the Disposal Process 4.3 Disposal Routes and Marketing 4.4 Sale and Completion 4.5 Post Transaction Monitoring Annex 1 - References Annex 2 - Heritage Assets Annex 3 - Issues Affecting Disposal Annex 4 - Advisers 3 4 1.0 Introduction and Purpose of the Guide 1.1 Introduction The disposal of surplus government owned property is an important part of the Government’s drive to improve its estate management and create an efficient, fit-for-purpose and sustainable estate that meets future needs.
    [Show full text]
  • The Planning Inspectorate COMMENTS on CASE (Online Version) Appeal Reference: APP/X0360/W/19/3241800
    For official use only (date received): 16/01/2020 16:59:03 The Planning Inspectorate COMMENTS ON CASE (Online Version) Please note that comments about this case need to be made within the timetable. This can be found in the notification letter sent by the local planning authority or the start date letter. Comments submitted after the deadline may be considered invalid and returned to sender. Appeal Reference: APP/X0360/W/19/3241800 DETAILS OF THE CASE Appeal Reference APP/X0360/W/19/3241800 Appeal By HAINES HOMES CONSTRUCTION Site Address Land to Rear of, 344 Barkham Road WOKINGHAM RG41 4DE SENDER DETAILS Name MR DAVID CLARKE Address 19 Dowles Barn Close Barkham WOKINGHAM RG41 4ET ABOUT YOUR COMMENTS In what capacity do you wish to make representations on this case? Appellant Agent Interested Party / Person Land Owner Rule 6 (6) What kind of representation are you making? Final Comments Proof of Evidence Statement Statement of Common Ground Interested Party/Person Correspondence Other Page 1 of 4 YOUR COMMENTS ON THE CASE Re Case APP/X0360/W/19/3241800 Orchard Grange (Wokingham) Management Company Limited are the owners of the access road ('Accessway')and the common land and infrastructure beyond as designated within BK469616 We have only just received the Deed of Easement dated 4 June 2019 from Cala via their solicitors Laytons on the 9th January 2020. The lands by way of BK469616 were transferred Title Absolute to Orchard Grange (Wokingham) Management Company on 18th July 2019 The proposed constructor has not consulted with the members of Orchard Grange (Wokingham) Management Company Limited (OGWMC) at any time other than 10th July 2019 post protest by the members at the taking down of a section of fence and removal of shrubs on Dowles Barn Close.
    [Show full text]
  • Dáil Éireann
    Vol. 1004 Wednesday, No. 3 17 February 2021 DÍOSPÓIREACHTAÍ PARLAIMINTE PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES DÁIL ÉIREANN TUAIRISC OIFIGIÚIL—Neamhcheartaithe (OFFICIAL REPORT—Unrevised) Insurance (Restriction on Differential Pricing and Profiling) Bill 2021: Second Stage [Private Members] � � � 219 17/02/2021U00500Ceisteanna ó Cheannairí - Leaders’ Questions � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 248 17/02/2021Y00900An tOrd Gnó - Order of Business � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 256 17/02/2021CC00050Ceisteanna ar Reachtaíocht a Gealladh - Questions on Promised Legislation � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 262 17/02/2021DD03000Message from the Standing Business Committee of Dáil Éireann � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 267 17/02/2021DD03200Rural Equality Bill 2021: First Stage � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 267 17/02/2021EE00900Principles of Social Welfare Bill 2021: First Stage� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 269 17/02/2021EE01700Civil Registration (Right of Adoptees to Information) (Amendment) Bill 2021: First Stage � � � � � � � � � � � � 270 17/02/2021FF00800Covid-19 (Agriculture, Food and the Marine): Statements� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 272 17/02/2021UU04700Land Development Agency Bill 2021: Order for Second Stage � � � � � � � � � � � � �
    [Show full text]
  • Health Building Note 00-08 Part B: Supplementary Information for Part A
    This document has been withdrawn. Find The efficient management of healthcare estates and facilities on the NHS websie. Health Building Note 00-08 Part B: Supplementary information for Part A Withdrawn October 2014 Health Building Note 00-08 Part B: Supplementary information for Part A Withdrawn Health Building Note 00-08 Part B: Supplementary information for Part A Withdrawn © Crown copyright 2014 You may re-use this information (not including logos) free of charge in any format or medium, under the terms of the Open Government Licence. To view this licence, visit www. nationalarchives. gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/ or write to the Information Policy Team, The National Archives, Kew, London TW9 4DU, or email: [email protected]. This document is available from our website at https://www.gov.uk/government/ collections/health-building-notes-core-elements ii Preface About Health Building Notes Health Building Note structure Health Building Notes give best practice The Health Building Notes have been organised guidance on the design and planning of new into a suite of 17 core subjects. healthcare buildings and on the adaptation/ extension of existing facilities. Care-group-based Health Building Notes provide information about a specific care group They provide information to support the briefing or pathway but cross-refer to Health Building and design processes for individual projects in Notes on generic (clinical) activities or the NHS building programme. support systems as appropriate. Core subjects are subdivided into specific The Health Building Note suite topics and classified by a two-digit suffix (-01, Healthcare delivery is constantly changing, and -02 etc), and may be further subdivided into so too are the boundaries between primary, Supplements A, B etc.
    [Show full text]
  • Transparency Report
    Transparency Report Transparency Report Government’s land and property disposals in 2017/18 and retrospective reporting for 2016/17 January 2019 1 Transparency Report 2 Transparency Report Transparency Report Government’s land and property disposals in 2017/18 and retrospective reporting for 2016/17 January 2019 3 Transparency Report © Crown copyright 2013 Produced by Cabinet Office You may re-use this information (excluding logos) free of charge in any format or medium, under the terms of the Open Government Licence. To view this licence, visit http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/ or email: [email protected] Where we have identified any third party copyright material you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned. Alternative format versions of this report are available on request from: [email protected] 4 Transparency Report Contents Introduction 7 Policy context 8 Land sales headlines 9 Details of assets sold 10 Appendix 1: Disposals guidance 43 Appendix 2: Transparency Review 43 Appendix 3: Glossary of terms 44 5 Transparency Report 6 Transparency Report Introduction The disposal of surplus government owned property is an important part of the Government’s drive to improve its estate management and create an efficient, fit-for-purpose and sustainable estate that meets future needs. This means disposing of surplus land and buildings in a way that delivers value for the taxpayer, boosts growth and delivers new homes. The Government has committed to freeing up land with capacity for at least 160,000 homes by 2020 and raising at least £5 billion from land and property disposals by 2020.
    [Show full text]
  • The Last Tax: Henry George and the Social Politics of Land Reform in the Gilded Age and Progressive Era
    The Last Tax: Henry George and the Social Politics of Land Reform in the Gilded Age and Progressive Era A Dissertation Presented to The Faculty of the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences Brandeis University Department of History Michael Willrich, Advisor In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy By Alexandra Wagner Lough August 2013 This dissertation, directed and approved by Alexandra Wagner Lough’s Committee, has been accepted and approved by the Faculty of Brandeis University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of: DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Malcolm Watson, Dean Graduate School of Arts and Sciences Dissertation Committee: Michael Willrich, Department of History Mark Hulliung, Department of History Daniel T. Rodgers, Department of History, Princeton University Copyright 2013 Alexandra Wagner Lough Doctor of Philosophy Acknowledgments This project properly began in 2004 when I was an undergraduate at the University of Pacific in Stockton, California and decided to write a history thesis on Henry George. As such, it seems fitting to begin by thanking my two favorite professors at Pacific, Caroline Cox and Robert Benedetti. Their work inspired my own and their encouragement and advice led me to pursue graduate work in history at Brandeis University. I am forever grateful for their support. I consider myself extremely fortunate to have been admitted into the Ph.D. program in American History at Brandeis. Not only have I received top-notch instruction from brilliant faculty, but I also have received generous funding. I want to extend my gratitude to Rose and Irving Crown and the Crown family for the fellowship that financed my graduate education.
    [Show full text]
  • 12730 Analysis of Law in UK BRX:Layout 1
    Analysis of Law in the United Kingdom pertaining to Cross-Border Disaster Relief Prepared for the British Red Cross by The views expressed in the report are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the British Red Cross. This report is part of a wider study on cross-border disaster assistance within the EU, carried out in conjunction with five other European National Societies, under the overall co-ordination of the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies. The wider project received funding from the European Commission, who bear no responsibility for the content or use of the information contained in this report. Front cover photograph © Layton Thompson/British Red Cross Flood relief measures in Oxford, 25 July 2007 Analysis of Law in the United Kingdom pertaining to Cross-Border Disaster Relief Foreword The United Kingdom is in the fortunate position of Fisher (International Federation of Red Cross and Red being less susceptible to large-scale natural disasters Crescent Societies), Mr Tim Gordon (HMRC), Mr than many other countries. Even so, and as recent Gordon MacMillan (Hanover Associates UK), Mr Roy years have shown, our territory may still be subject to Wilshire (Chief Fire Officer, Hertfordshire County) such emergencies as flooding, and the effects of severe and Ms Moya Wood-Heath (British Red Cross). winter weather. We also wish to thank the authors of this report, The purpose of this study, commissioned by the British Justine Stefanelli and Sarah Williams of the British Red Cross, is to examine the extent to which the legal, Institute of International and Comparative Law, administrative and operational framework for disaster who were assisted by Katharine Everett, Frances response within the UK is able to facilitate potential McClenaghan, Hidenori Takai and Payam Yoseflavi.
    [Show full text]
  • Reconstructing Public Housing Liverpool’S Hidden History of Collective Alternatives
    Reconstructing Public Housing Liverpool’s hidden history of collective alternatives Reconstructing Public Housing Liverpool’s hidden history of collective alternatives Reconstructing Public Housing Matthew Thompson LIVERPOOL UNIVERSITY PRESS First published 2020 by Liverpool University Press 4 Cambridge Street Liverpool L69 7ZU Copyright © 2020 Matthew Thompson The right of Matthew Thompson to be identified as the author of this book has been asserted by him in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the publisher. British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication data A British Library CIP record is available ISBN 978-1-78962-108-2 paperback eISBN 978-1-78962-740-4 Typeset by Carnegie Book Production, Lancaster An Open Access edition of this book is available on the Liverpool University Press website and the OAPEN library. Contents Contents List of Figures ix List of Abbreviations x Acknowledgements xi Prologue xv Part I Introduction 1 Introducing Collective Housing Alternatives 3 Why Collective Housing Alternatives? 9 Articulating Our Housing Commons 14 Bringing the State Back In 21 2 Why Liverpool of All Places? 27 A City of Radicals and Reformists 29 A City on (the) Edge? 34 A City Playing the Urban Regeneration Game 36 Structure of the Book 39 Part II The Housing Question 3 Revisiting
    [Show full text]
  • Dr Karl Mackie
    Dr Karl Mackie CEDR Solve Mediator, Founding CEO of CEDR/CEDR Solve Direct line: +44 (0) 20 7536 6090 Email: [email protected] "A great wealth of experience and knowledge ... calm, pragmatic, sensible and not shy of suggesting where there could be more possibilities" Mediation Background As founding CEO of CEDR and CEDR Solve, Karl Mackie has extensive experience of mediation and independent intervention. His mediation practice has a strong commercial and international perspective, including work with Sovereign governments and major public institutions. Karl is one of the best known names in commercial mediation practice and brings legal, business and psychological training to his core practice. As CEO of CEDR he has also been involved in mediation and process design for an extensive mix of complex multi-party cases, as well as regularly chairing negotiation sessions. Clients include Maxwell Pension Trusts, Atlantic Computers, BCCI, Alder Hey. Case values have ranged from £100,000 to £1bn plus. Karl also directs CEDR's Certificate in Advanced Negotiation, coaching senior professionals and executives on how to apply effective negotiation skills in their everyday work. Karl has extensive experience in the following sectors: Commercial Employment Engineering/Energy Entertainment Family Businesses Finance/Banking Insurance/Reinsurance International IP/IT Joint Ventures Partnerships Private Clients Professional Negligence Property Public Sector Media Telecommunications Transport For full details of Karl's mediation experience
    [Show full text]
  • Channel Tunnel Act 1987 Is up to Date with All Changes Known to Be in Force on Or Before 20 April 2021
    Status: Point in time view as at 30/01/2001. Changes to legislation: Channel Tunnel Act 1987 is up to date with all changes known to be in force on or before 20 April 2021. There are changes that may be brought into force at a future date. Changes that have been made appear in the content and are referenced with annotations. (See end of Document for details) Channel Tunnel Act 1987 1987 CHAPTER 53 An Act to provide for the construction and operation of a railway tunnel system under the English Channel, together with associated works; to provide for connected improvements in the road network near Ashford, in Kent, and in the rail network in South Eastern England; to incorporate part of the railway tunnel system into the United Kingdom and to provide for the application and enforcement of law in relation to, and otherwise for the regulation of, that system and matters connected with it; to provide for the construction of certain highways and associated works in the vicinity of Folkestone; and for connected purposes. [23rd July 1987] Be it enacted by the Queen’s most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, in this present Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows: Commencement Information I1 Act wholly in force at Royal Assent. PART I PRELIMINARY 1 Construction and operation of a tunnel rail link between the United Kingdom and France. (1) The primary purpose of this Act is to provide for the construction and operation of a tunnel rail link (together with associated works, facilities and installations) under the English Channel between the United Kingdom and France, in accordance with— (a) the Treaty between the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the French Republic concerning the Construction and Operation by Private Concessionaires of a Channel Fixed Link, signed at Canterbury 2 Channel Tunnel Act 1987 (c.
    [Show full text]
  • The Channel Tunnel Rail Link: Opportunities and Problems for Regional Economic Development
    THE CHANNEL TUNNEL RAIL LINK: OPPORTUNITIES AND PROBLEMS FOR REGIONAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, David Matthew Smith Thesis Submitted to the University of Plymouth in Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of Geographical Sciences University of Plymouth December 1992 THE CHANNEL TUNNEL RAIL LINK: OPPORTUNITIES AND PROBLEMS FOR REGIONAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. David Matthew Smith ABSTRACT The regional economic impact of the Channel Tunnel has engendered much public and private sector interest. Previous studies examining the regional implications of the Tunnel have argued that related development pressures will be largely confined to South East England, further widening the "North-South" divide. Economic Potential Analysis was earlier employed by Clark el. al. (1969) and Keeble et. al. (1982a) to model the geographical impact of the Tunnel on the relative accessibility of the UK regions. The conclusions drawn from these studies support the proposition that the South East would gain at the expense of the more peripheral regions. However, the important implications of a rail-only Tunnel have yet to be modelled. The results of the present study show that opportunities created by the Tunnel could be spread more evenly than had previously been predicted. However, following a review of the legislative and policy environment of the Tunnel and related infrastructure, it is argued that as a result of British Government inaction the more peripheral UK regions are likely to be unable to maximise any potential benefits created. Nonetheless, the overall regional economic impact of the Tunnel will depend ultimately on the reactions of the business community (Pieda 1989a&b).
    [Show full text]