Search for: "Matter of Ripa v Ripa"
Results 1 - 20
of 37
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
23 Nov 2022, 3:22 am
Co., 21 NY3d 324, 334), they sufficiently alleged the existence of an attorney-client relationship (see Ripa v Petrosyants, 203 AD3d 770; Blank v Petrosyants, 203 AD3d 685; Mawere v Landau, 130 AD3d 986, 990). [read post]
16 Nov 2022, 4:47 am
Co., 21 NY3d 324, 334), they sufficiently alleged the existence of an attorney-client relationship (see Ripa v Petrosyants, 203 AD3d 770; Blank v Petrosyants, 203 AD3d 685; Mawere v Landau, 130 AD3d 986, 990). [read post]
14 Sep 2022, 5:41 pm
Albermarle, LLC v. [read post]
8 Jun 2021, 2:58 am
The Court’s decision on RIPA In BBW the UK’s now superseded RIPA (Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000) regime was under challenge. [read post]
19 Oct 2020, 4:28 pm
Note that there are two more cases pending Case C-746/18 H.K. v Prokurator (Opinion handed down by AG Pitruzzella 21 Jan 2020) as well as references from Germany from 2019 and Ireland from 2020. [read post]
11 Sep 2019, 4:49 am
As a preliminary matter, of course, there must be evidence of an attorney client: relationship (Wei Cheng Chang v. [read post]
23 May 2019, 4:26 am
Therefore, as a matter of construction, the majority found that the wording in s.67(8) RIPA was not explicit enough to exclude judicial review, although did suggest that a more explicit formula might have excluded challenges to any determination or “purported determination” as “a nullity by reason of lack of jurisdiction, error of law, or any other matter” [111]. [read post]
22 May 2019, 4:58 pm
Therefore, as a matter of construction, the majority found that the wording in s.67(8) RIPA was not explicit enough to exclude judicial review, although did suggest that a more explicit formula might have excluded challenges to any determination or “purported determination” as “a nullity by reason of lack of jurisdiction, error of law, or any other matter” [111]. [read post]
19 May 2019, 4:15 pm
By a 4:3 majority the Court allowed the appeal, holding that s.67(8) of RIPA did not oust the supervisory jurisdiction of the High Court. [read post]
24 Mar 2019, 7:22 am
No matter, the point is that it chimes with my own experience. [read post]
29 Nov 2018, 9:05 am
While Mr Justice Leggatt’s judgment was that he was inclined to the view that RIPA 2000, s 67(8) does not exclude the possibility of judicial review, he agreed to the form of the order proposed by Sir Brian Leveson, who found that the IPT was not amenable to judicial review, in order to avoid the matter being re-argued by a differently constituted Divisional Court. [read post]
12 Oct 2018, 6:00 am
Four years later, in November 2017, the case was finally heard by a chamber of the ECHR alongside two related cases that also brought allegations under Article 8: the Bureau of Investigative Journalism and Alice Ross v. the United Kingdom (2014) and 10 Human Rights Organisations and Others v. the United Kingdom (2015). [read post]
9 Oct 2018, 7:28 am
The case is called, perhaps inevitably, Big Brother Watch and Others v. [read post]
14 Sep 2018, 3:48 am
But today it came back to life, with the European Court of Human Rights judgment in Big Brother Watch and others v UK. [read post]
13 Sep 2018, 9:12 am
But today it came back to life, with the European Court of Human Rights judgment in Big Brother Watch and others v UK. [read post]
10 Dec 2017, 4:18 pm
Surveillance On 16 November 2017 the Home Office launched a consultation on revised codes of practice under Parts 2 and 3 of RIPA. [read post]
30 Dec 2016, 4:23 pm
That happened with S.94 of the Telecommunications Act 1984 and, arguably, with bulk interception under RIPA. [read post]
30 Dec 2016, 4:23 pm
Three Reviews and several Parliamentary Committees later, it remains a matter of opinion whether the thousands of hours of labour that went into the Act have brought forth a swan or a turkey. [read post]
25 Oct 2016, 4:04 pm
To come back to the IPT, it applies the rulings in the judgement by the European Court of Human Right in Weber & Saravia v Germany [2008] and Kennedy v United Kingdom [2011] to solve issues 2 and 3 (Mention is also made of R E v United Kingdom [2016] and Szabo & Vissy v Hungary). [read post]
26 May 2016, 1:07 am
Sensitivity of content and metadataWhy does the distinction between content and metadata matter? [read post]
