| 000 | 00798cab a2200229 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | WB3210-29 | ||
| 008 | 090401t1996 xxu||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d | ||
| 035 | _a(Sirsi) u45193 | ||
| 041 | _aeng | ||
| 245 | _aNoise abatement notices | ||
| 260 | _c1996 | ||
| 350 | _a0 | ||
| 490 |
_aEstates Gazette Case Summaries _v[1996] EGCS 34(1) (2/3/96) |
||
| 520 | _a"R v Mid Sussex Justices ex parte Mid Sussex DC" QBD 19 February 1996. Considers whether noise abatement notices had to specify works required. Held, notices could not be found defective ab initio. | ||
| 650 | _aCLAY PIGEON SHOOTING | ||
| 650 | _aNOISE ABATEMENT NOTICES | ||
| 650 | _aSTATUTORY NUISANCE (APPEALS) REGULATIONS 1990 REG2 | ||
| 650 | _aWORKS REQUIRED | ||
| 690 | _aLAW-CASE LAW | ||
| 942 | _n0 | ||
| 948 | _c04/03/1997 | ||
| 999 |
_c28724 _d28724 |
||