Human rights Act: Article 1 of the first protocol 1
This Convention right provides that every natural or legal person is entitled to the peaceful enjoyment of his possessions. No one shall be deprived of his possessions except in the public interest and subject to the conditions provided for by law and by the general principles of international law.
An interference with property must also satisfy the requirements of legal certainty. In other words, there must be a law which permits the interference and that law must be sufficiently certain and accessible. There must also be procedural safeguards against arbitrary State decisions.
For over 8 years the Cheshire County Council has refused to tell me which specific statutory authority (law) gave them to power to implement the plan, which was the subject of my complaint to the York LGO, without my agreement.
Recently I also asked Cheshire County Council which specific statutory authority (law) gave them the power to implement option C without my agreement, once again they declined to answer my question.
By any stretch of the imagination that is wrong wrong wrong, for they are denying me the right to challenge the statutory authority (law) on which they rely by simply refusing to tell me what it is.
Whether the law in question eventually favours me or Cheshire County Council is clearly a matter for a judge to decide, however, Cheshire County Council's refusal to give me the information requested is a clear and unequivocal act of maladministration.
Unless of course Mrs Seex, the York LGO is involved because she doesn't think a council refusing to tell you which statutory authority they are relying on is anything to be concerned about. The corollary of this defines Seex' second law: A Council can infringe a citizen's legal or human rights rights and deny them the right to challenge any interference by the simple ruse of refusing to tell the citizen concerned which specific statutory authority (law) they are relying on to legitimise their actions.