From: hex@unseen.ac.am 
  
 On 22/09/2025 10:10, Mark Goodge wrote: 
 > On 20 Sep 2025 22:32:13 GMT, Roger Hayter  wrote: 
 > 
 >> On 20 Sep 2025 at 21:06:08 BST, "Mark Goodge" 
 >>  wrote: 
 >>> 
 >>> [1] I know you're not making the claim that commerce is an essential 
 aspect 
 >>> of advertising, but it has been ignorantly asserted elsewhere in this 
 >>> thread. So I might as well include the wording which clearly rebuts that 
 >>> particular misapprehension. 
 >> 
 >> Are you aware of any effective remedies for the unapproved display of any 
 of 
 >> these kinds of advertisement for less than a day? 
 > 
 > No. At least, not in planning law. If it causes any kind of physical harm 
 > (eg, the use of adhesive to attach a poster to a wall) then criminal damage 
 > charges can be pursued. But the mere display of an unauthorised advert for 
 a 
 > very short period has no sanction, because the initial remedy is simply to 
 > instruct the advertiser to remove it. 
 Do you accept that a local authority can only exercise what powers it 
 has, even in respect of an undisputed advertisement, 'in the interests 
 of amenity and public safety'? 
  
 That's what Section 3(1) of The Town and Country Planning (Control of 
 Advertisements) (England) Regulations 2007 says after all. 
  
 Those considerations do not seem to me to apply in the case we're 
 considering.  Accordingly, if the local authority tries to stop it, it 
 will be acting in excess of its powers, won't it?  Similarly, it 
 couldn't legitimately demand any 'authorisation' for it, could it? 
  
 --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05 
  * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)