tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8170718846507476773.post6110620525002081540..comments2022-12-13T14:45:12.233+00:00Comments on Martin Goodall's Planning Law Blog: Appeal changes mootedMartin H Goodallhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07079479984296674469noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8170718846507476773.post-25535878371725683872012-11-13T12:59:01.069+00:002012-11-13T12:59:01.069+00:00I am certainly not suggesting that LPAs should be ...I am certainly not suggesting that LPAs should be restricted in the presentation of their case; quite the opposite. I consider it essential that both parties should be able to put their case as fully as is necessary to ensure a fair trial of the issues. What concerns me about the suggestions put forward in the consultation document is that appellants could be put at a disadvantage. They must be given a proper opportunity to answer points made by the LPA. The present rules effectively prevent the lengthy ping-pong match (or ‘cross-examination by correspondence’) which sometimes went on years ago. There does not appear to be any justification for a further restriction on the rights of parties to present their cases fully and fairly. The published proposals are in danger of causing substantial injustice, and could lead to legal difficulties.Martin H Goodallhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07079479984296674469noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8170718846507476773.post-91378193641025249232012-11-12T22:03:20.704+00:002012-11-12T22:03:20.704+00:00Interesting stuff Martin. However, do you not thin...Interesting stuff Martin. However, do you not think that appellants having 6 months to prepare an appeal, all with the benefit of the case officers report, is enough time already? I think allowing LPA statements to address the full grounds of appeal is sensible because otherwise their statements just become a reiteration of the reasons for refusal in the original report, which for hard pressed LPAs seems like a waste of time. <br />ChrisAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8170718846507476773.post-22407825587354182452012-11-12T12:06:24.330+00:002012-11-12T12:06:24.330+00:00I have read Lord Heseltine’s report, and some of h...I have read Lord Heseltine’s report, and some of his suggestions are frankly unnecessary (and even counter-productive). This is one of them. If an applicant wants a quicker decision they can appeal non-determination after 8 weeks (although they must wait 13 or 16 weeks in certain cases). If an applicant has waited 26 weeks already, it is probably in the hope that they will get a permission from the LPA, otherwise they would already have appealed. Developers may not welcome an automatic referral to PINS in these circumstances.Martin H Goodallhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07079479984296674469noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8170718846507476773.post-9341222432797788352012-11-08T16:26:10.597+00:002012-11-08T16:26:10.597+00:00Heseltine calls for Inspectorate to determine all ...Heseltine calls for Inspectorate to determine all applications undecided after six months<br /><br />http://www.planningportal.gov.uk/general/news/stories/2012/nov12/081112/081112_2Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com