Craven v Island Dev. Cttee

JurisdictionJersey
CourtRoyal Court
Judge(Le Masurier, Bailiff and Jurats Lloyd and Downer):
Judgment Date20 April 1970
Date20 April 1970
ROYAL COURT
(Le Masurier, Bailiff and Jurats Lloyd and Downer):

M.M.G. Voisin for the plaintiff;

P.L. Crill, AttorneyGeneral, for the defendant.

Civil Procedure—judgments and orders—declaratory judgment—Royal Court has inherent jurisdiction to give declaratory judgment in appropriate case, to resolve actual not theoretical dispute

Planning Law—planning permission—conditional consent—remains valid subject to observance of conditions, despite change of overall planning policy

Planning Law—planning permission—conditional consent—unknown to Island Planning (Jersey) Law and confers no permission—nevertheless remains valid subject to observance of conditions, despite change of overall planning policy

LEMASURIER, BAILIFF: The facts which, in the opinion of the Court, are relevant to the issue to be tried are these—

In 1947 there were in force triennial Regulations entitled the Preservation of Amenities (Jersey) Regulations, 1947. Regulation 2 paragraphs (1) and (4) read respectively—

"(1) It shall not be lawful, without the consent of the Committee, to erect, make, extend or externally alter any building upon any land in the Island:"

"(4) Any consent given under this Regulation may be given subject to such conditions as the Committee may think fit to impose."

Regulation 5 read—

"In taking any action under Regulations 2 and 3 of these Regulations, the Committee shall have regard to the beauty of the landscape or countryside, the view from any road and the other amenities of the locality, and the suitability of any land for agricultural purposes and shall in no case consent to the erection or extension of a holiday camp or other like establishment."

Regulation 5 was amended in 1948 and all the Regulations were re-enacted in 1950 with the provision that any consent given under the 1947 Regulations should continue to have effect as if it had been given under the 1950 Regulations.

In 1952 the Regulations were replaced by a Law, the Preservation of Amenities (Jersey) Law, 1952, which introduced no change relevant to this case and contained the same saving provision.

That Law remained in force until the enactment of the Island Planning (Jersey) Law, 1964, which is still in force.

In 1947 the plaintiff learned that there was land for sale at Mont-à-la-Brune in the Parish of St. Brelade and, thinking that he could turn it to account for building, the plaintiff negotiated for its purchase. Before completing, however, the plaintiff, in compliance with the Regulations then in force, wrote to the Committee charged with the execution of the Regulations asking for permission to build twenty-five houses on the land. The plaintiff's letter can neither be found nor is any copy of it...

To continue reading

Request your trial
8 cases
  • C. Le Masurier Ltd v Island Development Committee
    • Jersey
    • Royal Court
    • 31 December 1985
    ...F.C. Hamon for the plaintiff; P.M. Bailhache, Solicitor General, for the defendant. Cases cited: (1) Craven v. Island Dev. Cttee., 1970 J.J. 1425, not followed. (2) Scott v. Island Dev. Cttee., 1966 J.J. 631, followed. (3) Wightman v. Island Dev. Cttee. (1963), 254 Ex. 449; 1959-63 T.D. 111......
  • Re McMahon
    • Jersey
    • Royal Court
    • 7 April 1993
    ...Service, [1985] A.C. 374; [1984] 1 W.L.R. 1174; [1984] 3 All E.R. 935; [1985] I.C.R. 14, explained. (4) Craven v. Island Dev. Cttee., 1970 J.J. 1425. (5) D.P.P. v. Humphrys, [1977] A.C. 1; [1977] Crim. L.R. 421, dictum of Viscount Dilhorne applied. (6) Gouriet v. Union of Post Office Worker......
  • Coopers and Lybrand Deloitte v Island Development Committee
    • Jersey
    • Royal Court
    • 26 February 1992
    ...C.R. 27; 121 Sol. Jo. 617, considered. (7) Cottignies v. Housing Cttee., 1969 J.J. 1149, distinguished. (8) Craven v. Island Dev. Cttee., 1970 J.J. 1425. (9) Howell v. Falmouth Boat Constr. Co. Ltd., [1951] A.C. 837; [1951] 2 All E.R. 278; [1951] 2 T.L.R. 151; [1951] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 45; (195......
  • Re Curatorship of X
    • Jersey
    • Royal Court
    • 27 March 2002
    ...respondent). The first and second respondents did not appear and were not represented. Cases cited: (1) Craven v. Island Dev. Cttee., 1970 J.J. 1425, considered. (2) Gouriet v. Union of Post Office Workers, [1978] A.C. 435; [1977] 3 All E.R. 70, not followed. (3) Guaranty Trust Co. of New Y......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT