Example sentences of "47 of [art] [noun pl] act " in BNC.
Next page| No | Sentence |
|---|---|
| 1 | The plaintiffs , a borough council , brought proceedings under section 222 of the Local Government Act 1972 and applied for an interlocutory injunction to restrain the defendants from using shop premises of theirs for trade on Sundays in breach of section 47 of the Shops Act 1950 The defendants resisted the claim against them on the ground , inter alia , that section 47 was in conflict with article 30 of the E.E.C . |
| 2 | This was an appeal by leave dated 18 November 1991 of the House of Lords ( Lord Bridge of Harwich , Lord Ackner and Lord Browne-Wilkinson ) by the appellants , Kirklees Metropolitan Borough Council , from the judgment dated 30 April 1991 of the Court of Appeal ( Dillon , Mann and Beldam L.JJ. ) allowing the appeal of the respondents , Wickes Building Supplies Ltd. , from the judgment dated 14 May 1990 of Mervyn Davies J. granting the appellants an interlocutory injunction to restrain the respondents from trading on Sunday contrary to section 47 of the Shops Act 1950 , within the appellants ' administrative area . |
| 3 | In England and Wales , Sunday trading is prohibited by section 47 of the Shops Act 1950 which provides , subject to certain specified exceptions , that ‘ Every shop shall … be closed for the serving of customers on Sunday . ’ |
| 4 | There can be no doubt , since the decision of this House in Stoke-on-Trent City Council v. B. & Q. ( Retail ) Ltd. [ 1984 ] A.C. 754 , that a local authority has power , in appropriate circumstances , to proceed in its own name by way of injunction to restrain infringements of section 47 of the Shops Act 1950 . |
| 5 | On the face of these two statutory provisions , it appears that proceedings in its own name by way of injunction are open to a local authority in order to secure observance of section 47 of the Shops Act . |
| 6 | On the other hand it was the submission of Mr. Collins for Wickes that the function of the undertaking in damages required of the council by the Court of Appeal was to protect the right of Wickes which flowed from the direct effect of article 30 , in the event of the European Court of Justice holding , on the reference to it of the Stoke-on-Trent case [ 1991 ] Ch. 48 , that section 47 of the Shops Act 1950 was invalid because it was inconsistent with article 30 . |
| 7 | But , having regard to the passage from the judgment of the European Court in the Francovich case which I have just quoted , it is in my opinion right that in the present case your Lordships should proceed on the basis that if , on the reference to it in the Stoke-on-Trent case [ 1991 ] Ch. 48 , the court should hold that section 47 of the Shops Act 1950 is invalid as being in conflict with article 30 of the Treaty , the United Kingdom may be obliged to make good damage caused to individuals by the breach of article 30 for which it is responsible . |
| 8 | In so deciding , he had to take into account the fact that it was plain that Wickes would , unless restrained , continue to act in contravention of section 47 of the Shops Act 1950 ; and that , in practical terms , proceedings by way of injunction were the only means open to the council to perform its duty to enforce the provisions of section 47 . |