Kelly v Monklands DC
Jurisdiction | Scotland |
Date | 1986 |
Year | 1986 |
Court | Court of Session |
-
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
View this document and try vLex for 7 days - TRY VLEX
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
11 cases
-
East Lothian Council For Judicial Review Of A Purported Decision Of The District Valuer Dated 13th April 1999. V.
...proof. He submitted that such a proof would be competent, in terms of Rule of Court 58.9 and he cited Kelly v Monklands District Council 1986 S.L.T.169, as an example of a petition in which a proof had taken place, after earlier hearings, at which the Court had relied upon the contents of a......
-
R v Oldham Metropolitan Borough Council, ex parte Garlick ; R v Bexley London Borough Council, ex parte Bentum; R v Tower Hamlets London Borough Council, ex parte Begum
...living and such a child may be vulnerable and in priority need by virtue of section 59(1)(c). See Kelly v. Monklands District Council 1986 S.L.T. 169. But however that may be, it cannot possibly be argued that a healthy four year old living with parents is other than a dependent child. Such......
-
The Queen v Bristol City Council ex parte Mihajlo Milan Bradic
...unintentionally homeless. See by analogy with the vulnerability provision in section 59(1)(c): Kelly v. Monklands District Council [1986] S.L.T. 169 and R v. Nithsdale District Council, ex p. Wilson [1992] S.L.T. 1131. 85 There is much force in the respondent's contention that a homeless ap......
-
R v Bristol City Council, ex parte Bradic
...unintentionally homeless: see by analogy with the vulnerability provision in section 59(1)(c) and Kelly v Monklands District Council (1986 SLT 169). There was force in the council's contention that a homeless applicant for housing who had been unlawfully evicted had to exhaust his remedies ......
Request a trial to view additional results