...
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Planning & Environment Law >R. (on the application of Frederick Davies) v Carmarthenshire CC and Mr and Mrs Gruffydd Morris
【24h】

R. (on the application of Frederick Davies) v Carmarthenshire CC and Mr and Mrs Gruffydd Morris

机译:R.(在Frederick Davies的申请中)v Carmarthenshire CC和Mr. Gruffydd Morris夫妇

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

40. While the court can well understand why it is that those who object to this proposal are profoundly disappointed that the members of the Committee have disagreed not only with the objectors, but also with the professional views of the Planning Officer, of the National Trust, and of the Conservation Officer of the Council, grounds 2-4 of this challenge cannot be sustained. The merits of planning decisions are for planning authorities or for the Welsh Ministers on appeal or call in, and not for the court. Ground 5 was not pursued before me.
机译:40.虽然法院可以很好地理解为什么反对这项建议的人深感失望,但委员会成员不仅反对者,而且也反对国家信托基金计划官员的专业意见。 ,以及理事会的保护官员,这种挑战的理由2-4无法维持。计划决策的优点是针对计划主管部门或威尔士部长的呼吁或征求意见,而不是针对法院。我面前没有追求地面5。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 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