A 60-year-old woman has won a legal challenge to a major urban regeneration programme involving the demolition of hundreds of houses.
Mrs Pascoe challenged the CPO granted to English Partnerships
Mr Justice Forbes has overturned a compulsory purchase order which would have forced Elizabeth Pascoe to move from her Liverpool home.
The judge also ruled that Mrs Pascoe's right to private and family life had been violated by the order.
Liverpool Land Development Company said it was a disappointing ruling.
Mrs Pascoe's solicitor, Phil Shiner, said the judge declared that English Partnerships, the acquiring authority, had acted outside its powers.
Mrs Pascoe challenged the CPO granted to English Partnerships to buy and bulldoze 500 homes at Edge Lane West in Liverpool for a new road scheme into the city centre and new housing.
Local Labour MP Jane Kennedy described the plan as "social cleansing" at the public inquiry that approved the plans.
Mrs Pascoe, who faced having to leave her Victorian terraced house in Adderley Street, had mixed feelings.
"This is a pyrrhic victory for me. It is bittersweet because much of my community has already been destroyed as a result of this initiative," she said.
"Many of my neighbours who had lived here happily for decades succumbed only recently to various pressures and left."
Nina Edge, who is campaigning against plans to bulldoze hundreds of homes in the Welsh Streets area of Liverpool, including the birthplace of ex-Beatle Ringo Starr, hoped the decision would set a precedent.
"The ruling on Edge Lane is unique and all the different threatened areas would be fought on slightly different grounds," she said.
"But the important thing is that the right of a person to live in their home has been made clear unless there is a really pressing infrastructure project."
Liverpool Land Development Company said it was awaiting "a further decision from the court as to the precise form and effect of the order to be given by the judge".
Eliot Lewis-Ward, area director for English Partnerships, said: "It is disappointing that the challenge has been upheld on the basis of incorrect wording in the decision letter, but we are hopeful this can be resolved swiftly."