Judicial review over the Decisions in the area of regulation ‎of historical environments in England legal system, A good ‎model for Iran's legal system

Document Type : Research Paper

Author

law favulty

Abstract

In England, although the initial regulation of cultural heritage laws and the approach to the protection of historical environments was due to the legal order, But over time, the role of the common law has become more colorful through the judicial review over the administrative decisions of the cultural heritage authorities and the regulation and protection of historical environments. In this regard, the jurisdiction of the first hearing regarding the administrative decisions of the historical environment protection authorities belongs to the planning court as a special court in the field of historical environment planning, and then the decisions of this court can be challenged in the appeals court and Finally, in the English Supreme Court. In this article, by studying the normative order and judicial procedure of England with a descriptive-analytical method, we conclude that what makes the British judicial system stand out in the field of judicial supervision of administrative decisions in the field of regulating historical environments is that First, identifying the interest of the general public in the possibility of filing a lawsuit against the regulatory bodies And the special consideration of the planning courts of historical environments and then the judges' attention to the principle of public interest in preserving the cultural heritage and historical environments through judicial review.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

  1. English

    1. Listed Building and Conservation Areas Act 1990.
    2. Ancient Monuments Protection Act1882.
    3. Antony Firth (2014). UK Safeguarding of Underwater Cultural Heritage Factual Background. Briefing Paper for BA/HFF Steering Committee on Underwater Cultural Heritage: 22 & 24
    4. Blundell,l.a & g. Dobry (1963). town and country planning.london: sweet Maxwell.
    5. Heather Campbell & Robert Marshall. (2000). Moral Obligations, Planning, and the Public Interest: A Commentary on Current British Practice, Environment and Planning B Planning and Design, Vol. 27(2).
    6. Historic England. (2015). Conservation Principles, Policies and Guidance for the Sustainable Management of the Historic Environment.
    7. https://historicengland.org.uk/advice/hpg/publicandheritagebodies/localgov/
    8. https://unece.org/DAM/env/pp/compliance/C201161/Communication/Planning_ListedBuildings_ConservationAreas_Regs1990.pdf
    9. https://www.bailii.org/form/search_cases.html
    10. https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/cliffords-tower/
    11. Ke, Xu. Comparative Analysis of Public of Architectural Heritage Conservation in East Asian and European Countries. PhD thesis, fakultat architektur, Technische Universitat Dresden: 101.
    12. Mansfield, J. R. (2013). Heritage Protection in England: The New Labour Legacy. Structural Survey, Vol. 31 (1), 6–20.
    13. minstry of housing, communities and local government. (2021). national planning policy framework, 58.
    14. Mualam, N. (2014). Appeal Tribunals in Land-Use Planning: Look-Alikes or Different Species? Urban Lawyer. Vol. 46, 33–96.
    15. Nir Mualam & Rachelle Alterman. (2018). Looking into the ‘black box’ of heritage protection: analysis of conservation area disputes in London through the eyes of planning inspectors, International Journal of Heritage Studies ,Vol. 24.
    16. Pearce, B. & M. Stubbs. (2000). The Role of Mediation in the Settlement of Planning Disputes at Appeal: The Debate and Research Agenda. Environment and Planning, a 32 (8), 1335–1358
    17. Ratcliffe, j, m. Stubbs & M. Keeping (2009). urban planning and real estate development.london: routledge: 96.
    18. Seddon Properties Ltd. v. Secretary of State for the Environment (1981) 42 P & CR 26
    19. Sheppard, A., D. Peel, H. Ritchie, and S. Berry. (2017). The Essential Guide to Planning Law: Decision-Making and Practice in the UK. Bristol: Policy Press.
    20. Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
    21. Hadavand, Mahdi (2016).Comparative administrative law. 1. Tehran: Samt Publications (In Persian).
    22. Heydari Shuli, Forough and Jalali, Mohammad (1400).A comparative study of the protection of historical monuments with private owners in the English and Iranian legal systems, from licensing to protest.Comparative law magazine.vol 12, No. 1: 67 (In Persian).
    23. Abbasi, Bijan, (2018). Legal dimensions of registering historical monuments in the list of national monuments, New Administrative Law Research Quarterly, No. 10:1 (In Persian).
    24. Abbasi, Bijan, (2019).Rights and duties of private owners of works registered in the list of national works. Quarterly Journal of Modern Researches of Administrative Law", Vol, Number 30:4 (In Persian).
    25. Heydari Shuli, Forough (1400).protection of immovable cultural heritage from the perspective of public rights;Comparative study of Iranian and English law.Public law doctoral thesis.Islamic Azad University, Science and Research Unit (In Persian).
    26. The Law on Preservation of National Monuments approved in 1309 (In Persian).
    27. Law of the Court of Administrative Justice approved in 2013 (In Persian).
    28. ADMINISTRATIVE COURT, CO/4231/2012, 08/03/2013
    29. THE COURT OF APPEAL, C1/2013/0843, 18/02/2014
    30. PLANNING COURT, CO/1932/2013, 9 July 2014
    31. PLANNING COURT, CO/6259/2016, 09/06/2017
    32. PLANNING COURT, CO/3284/2019, 31/07/2020
Comparative Law Review
Volume 14, Issue 1
Spring & Summer 2023
July 2023
Pages 241-267

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics