| 000 | 00766cab a2200181 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | WB2327-27 | ||
| 008 | 090401t1987 xxu||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d | ||
| 035 | _a(Sirsi) u39360 | ||
| 041 | _aeng | ||
| 245 | _aTimetable insufficient | ||
| 260 | _c1987 | ||
| 350 | _a0 | ||
| 490 |
_aTimes _v6/7/87 28 |
||
| 520 | _aSmith v SoS Environment and another , CA 22 June 1987. It was not an explanation of delay, sufficient to justify the court exercising its discretion to extend time under Order 3, rule 5 of the Rules of the Supreme Court, for a party merely to set out the chronology of events which had resulted in delay without giving any reasons which would tend to excuse it. | ||
| 690 | _aPLANNING LAW AND PRACTICE-CASE LAW | ||
| 942 | _n0 | ||
| 948 | _c04/03/1997 | ||
| 999 |
_c25270 _d25270 |
||