• Tidak ada hasil yang ditemukan

This copy is not an authorised reprint within the meaning of the Reprints Act 1992 (Qld).

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2023

Membagikan "This copy is not an authorised reprint within the meaning of the Reprints Act 1992 (Qld). "

Copied!
4
0
0

Teks penuh

(1)

Warning

“Queensland Statute Reprints”

QUT Digital Collections

This copy is not an authorised reprint within the meaning of the Reprints Act 1992 (Qld).

This digitized copy of a Queensland legislation pamphlet reprint is made available for non-commercial educational and research purposes only. It may not be reproduced for commercial gain.

©State of Queensland

(2)

This reprint has been prepared under the A u t h ~ r i ~ of the ~ a r l i a ~ e ~ ~ ~ Counsel’s Office

BY A ~ ~ O R I ~

S . R. HAMPSON, GOVERNMENT PRINTER, Q U E E N ~ ~ A N ~ - l P P ~

(3)

1. Short title 2. Repeal

3. C o r n ~ e ~ c e r n e ~ t 4. ~ n t ~ ~ r e ~ ~ i o n 5. Penalty enacted by way of notice

(4)

QUEENSLAND

ULATH 1

[Reprinted as at 1 August, 19901

~ R e ~ u l a t i o n ~ p u b ~ s ~ e ~ Gazette 18 June 1988, p. 1403.1

D e ~ a ~ ~ ~ n t of Local Government, Brisbane, 16th June, 1988.

HIS Excellency the Governor, acting by and with the advice of the Executive Council and in pursuance of the provisions of the Litter Act 1971-1978, has been pleased to make the following regulations.

1, ~~o~ title. These regulations may be cited as the Litter ~ e g u l a ~ ~ n ~ 1988.

.

“The Litter e ~ u l a t ~ o n s of 1971” are hereby

eale^ le^.

.

These r~gulations shall c o ~ m e n c e on 1 July,

ion, In these regulations, unless the contrary intention

“Act” means the Litter Act ~ 9 ~ 1 - 1 ~ 7 8 .

notice. The prescribed penalty for the purposes of section 9 (2) (d) of the Act shall be $25.00.

BY AUTHORITY

S. R. HAMPSON, GOVERNMENT PRINTER, Q U E ~ N S ~ A N ~ - l 9 8 9 104343 (~~248)-10/89

Referensi

Dokumen terkait

Although earnings management may result in more or less persistent earnings, my empirical results show that real earnings management through the abnormal reduction in discretionary

The agreement of Matthew and Luke at this point makes a rather strong case for their use of a source which placed a visit of Jesus to Nazareth early in the gospel story.. This source