AG v Benest [2002] JRC 119 (11 June 2002)

AG v Benest [2002] JRC 119 (11 June 2002)

Mr. Benest breached planning law by undertaking development without permission; mitigation factors justify a reduced penalty.

Citation
[2002] JRC 119
Parties
Defendant: Mr. Benest; Witness: Mr. Stein
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
11 June 2002
Procedural Posture
Planning Law Breach / Judgment
Outcome
fine imposed with costs and imprisonment in default
Legal Topics
Unauthorised Development, Mitigation, Penalty Assessment
Planning Law Unauthorised Development Mitigation Penalty Assessment

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 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr. Benest

Defendant

Mr. Stein

Witness

Procedural Posture

Planning Law Breach / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Mr. Benest breached planning law by undertaking development without permission
  2. 2 Whether mitigation factors warrant reduction in penalty

Ratio Decidendi

Mr. Benest breached planning law by undertaking development without permission; mitigation factors justify a reduced penalty.

Court Disposition

fine imposed with costs and imprisonment in default

Orders

  • Fine of £2,000 to be paid within one month
  • 2 months' imprisonment in default