Planning Theory

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Booth, P.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Planning Theory, Vol. 6, No. 2, 127-145 (2007)
DOI: 10.1177/1473095207077585

The control of Discretion: Planning and the Common-Law tradition

Philip Booth

University of Sheffield, UK, p.booth{at}sheffield.ac.uk

The very marked differences that exist between the planning systems of continental Europe and Britain are generally understood to be the result of contrasting legal systems. This article explores the origins of the common-law tradition of England and the way it came to influence public local administration. It seeks to demonstrate the impact that common law has had on the way in which town planning is conceptualized and some of the strengths and weaknesses that result.

Key Words: common law • development control • discretion • rule of law • town and country planning


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?