You are reading a single comment by @Oliver Schick and its replies. Click here to read the full conversation.
  • It's sheer pathos that the power to order it demolished stems from the fact that he removed the tarpaulin, not that he built it in the first place.

    That is certainly ridiculous, but I think the fact that it's possible to make a legal decision on such a point says more about the general application of the law in this country than about this particular case or about planning legislation. I don't know much about the law, but I seem to hear about cases of excessively literal interpretation all the time.

About