...
首页> 外文期刊>San Joaquin Agricultural Law Review >DOES A WILLIAMSON ACT CONTRACT HAVE CONSTITUTIONAL STATUS?
【24h】

DOES A WILLIAMSON ACT CONTRACT HAVE CONSTITUTIONAL STATUS?

机译:威廉逊法案合同是否具有宪法规定的状态?

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

This Article will explore the legal nature of contracts made between California counties and landowners ("Act Contracts") pursuant to the Land Conservation Act of 1965 ("Williamson Act" or the "Act"). By analyzing the different ways Act Contracts aremodified, cancelled, rescinded, Or breached, this Article will show that Act Contracts are exactly what they claim to be - mere contracts. Accordingly, they neither have nor deserve a higher status than ordinary contracts and do not enjoy a "Constitutional status" sometimes claimed by participating public agencies and the California Department of Conservation ("Department"). This Article will show the original intent of the Act was not to impart Constitutional status on Act Contracts and that the purposes of the Act are not served by claiming otherwise.
机译:本条款将探讨根据1965年《土地保护法》(《威廉森法》或《法》)在加利福尼亚州县和土地所有者之间订立的合同(“法合同”)的法律性质。通过分析修改,取消,撤销或违反法律合同的不同方式,本文将证明法律合同正是他们所声称的-仅仅是合同。因此,它们既没有普通合同也不应享有比普通合同更高的地位,并且不享有参与机构和加利福尼亚环境保护部(“部门”)有时声称的“宪法地位”。该条款将表明该法案的初衷不是要赋予该法案合同以宪法上的地位,并且该法案的目的不能通过提出其他主张来实现。

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