Just to pick up on this (and related to Bradley's comments about reports
lacking data he wanted)
> I'd say that a report that lacked key information that was required by a relevant standard should be the basis for refusing to discharge a condition shouldn't it? Otherwise what force does any condition have
Planning conditions do not in general go into the nitty gritty of a
requirement, but a report that (in the curator's opinion) failed to meet
all aspects of a standard might be signed off anyway by the case
officer. Planning conditions are too cumbersome to accommodate the
nuanced world of such judgements, and their enforcement is a grey area
where the planning authority has the absolute right (subject to judicial
review) to refuse a submission by an applicant seeking discharge, in
practice giving the authority's officers considerable freedom to insist
of further submissions.
But a planning authority's test would fitness for purpose: a report
produced for planning would be tested for planning purposes. It would
be difficult for an authority to reject a report because it might fail
to be fit for some other purpose, like research.
If Bradley argues that a report must contain a plan, in the planning
context it may well be the case that a plan was provided by some other
mechanism: this reduces the value (to him) of the report (unless he
sought this information out) but is irrelevant to whether the report
served its primary purpose.
Martin
--
Martin Locock
Rheolwr Cymorth y Project Project Support Manager
Llyfrgell Genedlaethol Cymru National Library of Wales
[log in to unmask] Ffôn / Phone 01970 632885
Un o lyfrgelloedd mawr y byd One of the great libraries of the world
http://www.llgc.org.uk/
|