Manning v Att. Gen. [2000] JLR 284 (16 August 2000)

Manning v Att. Gen. [2000] JLR 284 (16 August 2000)

A charge under Island Planning (Jersey) Law, art. 8(1) must specify whether it alleges development without permission or breach of a condition, and if the latter, must specify the condition and the respects in which there is non-compliance, so the accused knows the case to be met.

Citation
[2000] JLR 284
Parties
Applicant: Manning; Respondent: Attorney General
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
16 August 2000
Procedural Posture
Planning Law Breach of Condition / Judgment
Outcome
Judgment clarifies requirements for charges under Island Planning (Jersey) Law, art. 8(1)
Legal Topics
Planning Permission, Breach of Condition, Island Planning (jersey) Law, Art. 8(1)
Planning Law Planning Permission Breach of Condition Island Planning (jersey) Law, Art. 8(1)

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Manning

Applicant

Attorney General

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Planning Law Breach of Condition / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a charge under Island Planning (Jersey) Law, art. 8(1) must specify if the allegation is development without permission or breach of condition of permission
  2. 2 If breach of condition is alleged, whether the charge must specify the condition and the respects in which there is non-compliance

Ratio Decidendi

A charge under Island Planning (Jersey) Law, art. 8(1) must specify whether it alleges development without permission or breach of a condition, and if the latter, must specify the condition and the respects in which there is non-compliance, so the accused knows the case to be met.

Court Disposition

Judgment clarifies requirements for charges under Island Planning (Jersey) Law, art. 8(1)