University of Wolverhampton
Browse
Collection All
bullet
bullet
bullet
bullet
Listed communities
bullet
bullet
bullet
bullet
bullet
bullet
bullet
bullet
bullet
bullet
bullet
bullet
bullet

Wolverhampton Intellectual Repository and E-Theses > School of Law, Social Sciences and Communications > School of Legal Studies > Legal Studies Research Group  > Crime Prevention v Planning: Section 17 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998. Is it a Material Consideration?

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/2436/26167
    Del.icio.us     LinkedIn     Citeulike     Connotea     Facebook     Stumble it!



Title: Crime Prevention v Planning: Section 17 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998. Is it a Material Consideration?
Authors: Moss, Kate
Citation: Crime Prevention and Community Safety, 3(2): 43-48
Publisher: Palgrave Macmillan
Journal: Crime Prevention and Community Safety
Issue Date: 2001
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/2436/26167
DOI: 10.1057/palgrave.cpcs.8140088
Additional Links: http://www.palgrave-journals.com/cpcs/index.html
http://direct.bl.uk/bld/PlaceOrder.do?UIN=094753806&ETOC=RN&from=searchengine
Abstract: In a previous paper, Moss and Pease outlined that although Section 17 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 was arguably the most radical section, this did not appear to have been recognised. Specifically, fieldwork suggested that police requests for crime prevention measures, made on the basis of Section 17, were not consistently being accommodated, particularly where they conflicted with what planning officers wanted. It was argued that Section 17 should have a greater visible impact upon the agencies that it would necessarily affect. Contested planning applications since this time suggest that whilst many police forces and local councils, including planning departments, have been working hard to implement the requirements of Section 17, this is being undermined by decisions of the Planning Inspectorate. They maintain that in the absence of case law, Section 17 does not constitute a material consideration in terms of planning. Some examples, which have been contested on this basis, are discussed. It is suggested that the Planning Inspectorate should interpret Section 17 as a material consideration, in line with the guidelines laid down in Home Office Circular 5/94 'Planning Out Crime'3 and give greater primacy to the views held by the public in Crime Audits.
Type: Article
Language: en
Keywords: Crime prevention
UK
Local authorities
Planning Inspectorate
Crime and Disorder Act 1998
Human Rights Act 1998
Criminal law
ISSN: 1460-3780
Appears in Collections: Legal Studies Research Group
Legal Studies Research Group

Files in This Item:

There are no files associated with this item.



All Items in WIRE are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

 

Fairtrade - Guarantees a better deal for Third World Producers

University of Wolverhampton, Wulfruna Street, Wolverhampton, WV1 1LY

Course enquiries: 0800 953 3222, General enquiries: 01902 321000,
Email: enquiries@wlv.ac.uk | Freedom of Information | Disclaimer and copyright | Website feedback | The University as a charity

OR Logo Powered by Open Repository | Cookies