R (Sainsbury's Supermarkets Ltd) v Wolverhampton City Council - определение. Что такое R (Sainsbury's Supermarkets Ltd) v Wolverhampton City Council
Diclib.com
Словарь ChatGPT
Введите слово или словосочетание на любом языке 👆
Язык:

Перевод и анализ слов искусственным интеллектом ChatGPT

На этой странице Вы можете получить подробный анализ слова или словосочетания, произведенный с помощью лучшей на сегодняшний день технологии искусственного интеллекта:

  • как употребляется слово
  • частота употребления
  • используется оно чаще в устной или письменной речи
  • варианты перевода слова
  • примеры употребления (несколько фраз с переводом)
  • этимология

Что (кто) такое R (Sainsbury's Supermarkets Ltd) v Wolverhampton City Council - определение


R (Sainsbury's Supermarkets Ltd) v Wolverhampton City Council         
R (Sainsbury’s Supermarkets Ltd) v Wolverhampton CC [2010] UKSC 20 is an English public law case involving invalid considerations of (factors considered by) a local council in making a compulsory purchase order. Judicial review was available and upheld in this case on one or more of four available grounds, namely: error of law, irrationality, serious procedural irregularity, and action for an improper purpose.
City of Wolverhampton Council elections         
  • 2004 results map
  • 2006 results map
  • 2007 results map
  • 2008 results map
  • 2010 results map
  • 2018 results map
  • 2021 results map
City of Wolverhampton Council elections are held three years out of every four, with a third of the council elected each time. City of Wolverhampton Council is the local authority for the metropolitan borough of Wolverhampton in the West Midlands, England.
1984 Wolverhampton Metropolitan Borough Council election         
The Council elections held in Wolverhampton on Thursday 3 May 1984 were one third, and 20 of the 60 seats were up for election.

Википедия

R (Sainsbury's Supermarkets Ltd) v Wolverhampton City Council
R (Sainsbury’s Supermarkets Ltd) v Wolverhampton CC [2010] UKSC 20 is an English public law case involving invalid considerations of (factors considered by) a local council in making a compulsory purchase order. Judicial review was available and upheld in this case on one or more of four available grounds, namely: error of law, irrationality, serious procedural irregularity, and action for an improper purpose.