Sir Thayne Forbes Judgements on Retrospective Applications

The request was refused by Ministry of Justice.

alan harvey flounders

Dear Ministry of Justice,

Would you please pass this to your F.O.I. Officer.

Sir Thayne Forbes’ judgments during his time as a judge are mostly matters of public record and can be obtained from the website or from published case reports and commentaries. Examples of some of his major cases include:

Sir Thayne Forbes, sitting in the Queen’s Bench Division, so held on 3 February 2010 when dismissing an appeal by Robert Fidler pursuant to s 289 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 against the decisions of an inspector appointed by the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, in a decision letter of 7 May 2008, to dismiss his three appeals under s 174 of the 1990 Act against enforcement notices issued by the local planning authority,

(1) My understanding of the above High Court decision, highlights that some people have in the past, and are now, attempting to sidestep the Correct Planning System for their own ends, by applying for a Certificate of Lawfulness or a Retrospective planning application, hoping to benefit
from this deception of the local planning authority and elected councillors and their neighbour.?

(2) Does the above Legal Ruling now apply to all local councils planning authorities. Or are they allowed to decide whether a Certificate Lawfulness is no longer a legal requirement.

(3) If a Retrospective Application is Granted, which contains land and property NOT in the legal ownership of the Applicant, is the Applicant then deemed to be the Legal Owner of the disputed property.

Yours faithfully,

alan harvey flounders

Data Access & Compliance Unit, Ministry of Justice

This is an Auto Reply from the Data Access & Compliance Unit.

Thank you for your e-mail.

If your message was a request for information please be advised that your
request is being dealt with and you will receive a written acknowledgement
shortly.

Data Access & Compliance Unit

Information Directorate

Ministry of Justice
6th Floor, Zone B, Postal Point 6.23
102 Petty France
London
SW1H 9AJ

Fax: 0203 334 2245

E-mail: [email address]

This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of
the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage or copying
is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all
copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message
could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in
mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message
by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be
monitored, recorded and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail
monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be
read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not
broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

show quoted sections

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or
recorded for legal purposes.

Data Access & Compliance Unit, Ministry of Justice

1 Attachment

Dear Mr Flounders, Please see attached letter.

Regards

Data Access and Compliance Unit
6TH floor 102 Petty France.
Post point 6.25
London
SW1H 9AJ

show quoted sections

alan harvey flounders

Dear Data Access & Compliance Unit,

Dear Jushna Chowdhury,
I am still awiating for the response to my freedom of Informations request of the 15th May 2010,

Your reply to me, dated 18th May 2010, stated that my requests had been passed to another ministerial unit who would ensure I received a reply, this is now long overdue, will you please forward an explanation.

Yours sincerely,

alan harvey flounders

Data Access & Compliance Unit, Ministry of Justice

Dear MCU, please see below. Can you update requestor on progress of this
request.

Regards

Data Access and Compliance Unit
6TH floor 102 Petty France.
Post point 6.25
London
SW1H 9AJ

show quoted sections

alan harvey flounders

Dear Data Access & Compliance Unit,

Dear Jushna Chowdhury,

On the 19th July 2010, I contacted your office regarding the following,
I am still awaiting for the response to my freedom of Information
request of the 15th May 2010,

Your reply to me, dated 18th May 2010, stated that my requests had been passed to another Ministerial Unit
who would ensure I received a reply, this is now long
overdue, will you please forward an explanation for such a very long delay.

Yours sincerely,

alan harvey flounders

alan harvey flounders

Dear Ministry of Justice,

Can you please explain why I am still awaiting a reply to my F.O.I. requests.

Yours faithfully,

alan harvey flounders

Data Access & Compliance Unit, Ministry of Justice

Dear Mr Flounders,

Thank you for your email, please can you supply the reference number and
a copy of the request, so I can pass on your email to the relevant
caseworker.

Regards
DACU

show quoted sections

alan harvey flounders

Dear Data Access & Compliance Unit,

A full history of my F.O.I. request and all corespondence is available on the internet at the address
http;//www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/pr

Yours sincerely,

alan harvey flounders

Data Access & Compliance Unit, Ministry of Justice

Dear Mr Flounders,

Thank you for your email, please can you supply the reference
number and
a copy of the request, so I can pass on your email to the relevant
caseworker.

Regards
DACU

show quoted sections

alan harvey flounders

Dear Data Access & Compliance Unit,
Dear Sir/Madam,
Thank you for your reply But I am confused to what I have to do to fulfil your request, I have never been given a Reference number to the best of my knowledge,
I would welcome any assistance or advice to enable me to answer your e.mail.

A full history of my F.O.I. request and all corespondence is
available on the internet at the address
http;//www.whatdotheyknow.com
Yours sincerely,

alan harvey flounders

Data Access & Compliance Unit, Ministry of Justice

Dear Mr Flounders,

As mentioned in previous emails please can you provide a copy of your
original request so we can pass on your emails to the relevant case
adviser.

Regards
DACU

show quoted sections

alan harvey flounders

Dear Data Access & Compliance Unit,
Thank you for your latest reply to my request, herewith a copy of my original requests.

Sir Thayne Forbes, sitting in the Queen’s Bench Division, so held
on 3 February 2010 when dismissing an appeal by Robert Fidler
pursuant to s 289 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 against
the decisions of an inspector appointed by the Secretary of State
for Communities and Local Government, in a decision letter of 7 May
2008, to dismiss his three appeals under s 174 of the 1990 Act
against enforcement notices issued by the local planning authority,

(1) My understanding of the above High Court decision, highlights
that some people have in the past, and are now, attempting to
sidestep the Correct Planning System for their own ends, by
applying for a Certificate of Lawfulness or a Retrospective
planning application, hoping to benefit
from this deception of the local planning authority and elected
councillors and their neighbour.?

(2) Does the above Legal Ruling now apply to all local councils
planning authorities. Or are they allowed to decide whether a
Certificate Lawfulness is no longer a legal requirement.

(3) If a Retrospective Application is Granted, which contains land
and property NOT in the legal ownership of the Applicant, is the
Applicant then deemed to be the Legal Owner of the disputed
property.

Yours faithfully,

alan harvey flounders

Yours sincerely,

alan harvey flounders

Customer Services (CSHQ),

1 Attachment

  • Attachment

    TRIM RE FW Freedom of Information request Sir Thayne Forbes Judgements on Retrospective Applications.txt

    2K Download View as HTML

Dear Sir,

Thank you for your email. This does not come under our remit. I suggest
you seek legal advice.

Regards
HMCS

show quoted sections

alan harvey flounders

Dear Customer Services (CSHQ),

Dear Sir or Madam,
Data Access & Compliance Unit Ministry of Justice.

I feel I must write to protest at your handling of my “original “ Freedom of Information requests submitted to your department on 15th May 2010,
To which I received an acknowledgement, on 18th May 2010, that you had passed my request to the unit responsible who would ensure I would receive a response and advised my requests is being dealt with.

19th July 2010. After a further delay of 65 days,
I wrote to Mr. Jushna Chowdhury that I was still awaiting a response to my original request submitted on 15th May 2010. I received the following on 19th July 2010, stating the following
Dear MCU , can you please update requestor on progress of his Freedom of Information request.

After a further delay of 32 days, on 12th August 2010. I sent the following to Mr. Justna Chowdhury,
I am still awaiting a response to my Freedom of Information request of the 15th May 2010.

Your reply to me dated 18th May 2010, stated that my request had been passed to “ another ministerial Unit “. Who would ensure I received a reply, this is now long overdue, will you please forward an explanation for such a very long delay.
31st August 2010,
I sent another reminder that I was still awaiting a reply to my request.

2nd September 2010,
I received a request from your department to supply a reference number and a copy of my original request, so you can pass on my e=mail to the relevant caseworker.

3rd September 2010,
I replied that a full history of my Freedom of Information requests and all correspondence is available on the Internet site http;//whatdotheyknow.com.

6th September 2010.
Your office again requested I supply a reference number and a copy of my Freedom of Information request, so it could be forwarded to the relevant caseworker.

7th September 2010,
I replied that I was a little confused to what I had to do to fulfil your repeated requests , I had never been allocated a reference number for my F.O.I. request to the best of my knowledge, and would welcome any advice to answer your e-mail. And repeated that all correspondence regarding my requests is available on this site, whatdotheyknow.com.

9th September 2010,
Again you request that I provide a copy of my original F.O.I. request dated 15th May 2010 so you can pass it on the relevant caseworker.

21st September 2010, To enable progress to be made on my Original request of 15th May 2010, I sent a complete copy of original requests available on this site, www.whatdotheyknow.com

22nd September 2010, I received the following response to my Freedom of Information request from Customer Services (CHHQ)
Dear Sir,
Thank you for your e-mail, this does not come under our remit, I suggest you seek legal advice ?
No answers. no apology nor any explanation on why the Ministry of Justice failed completely to uphold the law., regarding Freedom of my Information Requests. A very simple YES or NO was all that was Required.?

To receive this rejection of my Freedom of Information request after a delay of over three months and countless reminders of your responsibilities to reply in 20 days, highlights the fact that any Officer of the Ministry of Justice appear to be above the laws of this land. While other tax paying citizens are required to obey without question ? I feel my previous held opinion that the Ministry of Justice was a very senior Government Department , where any law abiding citizen could receive a fair and just hearing has been severely damaged , I feel your handling of my F.O.I. requests disgusting.?

Yours sincerely,

alan harvey flounders

Trevor R Nunn left an annotation ()

Unfortunately FOI only allows access to information held by a public authority.

Asking for opinion or advice gives them a valid reason for refusal.

Please refer to their response of the 15th May

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/35...

It's better to try and re-phrase your needs into a request for information held.