首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Planning & Environment Law >R. (on the application of HS2 Action Alliance Ltd and Hillingdon LBC) v Secretary of State for Transport and High Speed 2 (HS2) Ltd
【24h】

R. (on the application of HS2 Action Alliance Ltd and Hillingdon LBC) v Secretary of State for Transport and High Speed 2 (HS2) Ltd

机译:R.(根据HS2行动联盟有限公司和Hillingdon LBC的申请)v运输和高速二国大臣(HS2)Ltd

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

For the reasons I have given, whilst I grant permission for the claim to proceed, the claim itself is dismissed. Comment. This decision of Lindblom J was upheld by the Court of Appeal on December 9, 2014 [2014] EWCA Civ 1578. The fact that the Court of Appeal's judgment was a mere 23 paragraphs long demonstrates the robustness of Lindblom J's decision. His conclusion that the Safeguarding Directions do not "set the framework for development consent" was described by Sullivan LJ as according with common sense and he went on to state that his reasons largely echoed those given by Lindblom J.
机译:出于我给出的理由,尽管我允许进行索赔,但索赔本身被驳回。评论。上诉法院于2014年12月9日[2014] EWCA Civ 1578维持了Lindblom J的这一决定。上诉法院的判决仅23段长,这一事实说明了Lindblom J判决的稳健性。沙利文·吕杰(Sullivan LJ)认为,他的结论是“保障方向不为发展同意书设定框架”,这是常识。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号