82,891
edits
Lisle-Mainwaring v Kensington and Chelsea: Difference between revisions
Lisle-Mainwaring v Kensington and Chelsea (view source)
Revision as of 19:14, 19 December 2020
, 19 December 2020no edit summary
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| (2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{ | {{a|casenote|[[File:Stripey House.png|thumb|450px|center|The said stripey house]]}} | ||
On the falfsification of {{tag|Latin}} maxims. | On the falfsification of {{tag|Latin}} maxims. | ||
The notion that, as they say, ''[[anus matronae parvae malas leges faciunt]]''<ref>“[[Little old ladies make bad law]]” .</ref> was roundly routed as a general proposition in this great case in which decided that if an aggrieved lady wishes to paint her house with red and white stripes out of sheer [[bloody-minded]]ness, then at law she is entitled to do so, at least as far as s. 215 of the ''Town and Country Planning Act 1990'' is concerned, and there is nothing the officious little pen pushers at the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea can do to stop her. | The notion that, as they say, ''[[anus matronae parvae malas leges faciunt]]''<ref>“[[Little old ladies make bad law]]” .</ref> was roundly routed as a general proposition in this great case in which decided that if an aggrieved lady wishes to paint her house with red and white stripes out of sheer [[bloody-minded]]ness, then at law she is entitled to do so, at least as far as s. 215 of the ''Town and Country Planning Act 1990'' is concerned, and there is nothing the officious little pen pushers at the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea can do to stop her. | ||
{{draft}} | {{draft}} | ||
{{ | {{sa}} | ||
Judgment: [[File:Lisle-mainwaring_v_RBKC.pdf]] | Judgment: [[File:Lisle-mainwaring_v_RBKC.pdf]] | ||
{{ref}} | {{ref}} | ||