Search for: "State v. Arden"
Results 1 - 20
of 231
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
3 Apr 2024, 9:01 pm
Indeed, as one federal court recently stated, “the ‘crypto’ nomenclature may be of recent vintage, but the challenged transactions fall comfortably within the framework that courts have used to identify securities for nearly eighty years. [read post]
1 Oct 2023, 6:30 am
In the recent UK Supreme Court decision O (a minor), R (on the application of v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2022] UKSC 3, Lord Hodge provided a pithy statement of the approach of the courts in that jurisdiction. [read post]
11 Aug 2023, 8:40 am
Following the decision of Arden LJ in Giles v Rhind, the Court of Appeal determined that ‘breach of duty’ is applicable to any legal wrongdoing. [read post]
12 Dec 2022, 7:46 am
His judgment stated that “the harm caused by the repudiation of the promise is not the same as the detriment suffered. [read post]
3 Nov 2022, 11:00 pm
There are 26 federative states (and the federal district) in Brazil, each of which have the powers to adopt their own Constitutions and laws, subject to the rules and principles provided for under the Federal Constitution. [read post]
10 Oct 2022, 6:00 pm
[1] BTI 2014 LLC v Sequana SA [2022] UKSC 25. [2] Companies Act 2006, section 172. [3] Companies Act 2006, section 172(3). [4] BTI 2014 LLC v Sequana SA [2019] EWCA Civ 112. [5] BTI 2014 LLC v Sequana SA [2022] UKSC 25 [7] (Reed LJ). [6] Companies Act 2006, Part 23. [7] https://www.supremecourt.uk/press-summary/uksc-2019-0046.html [8] https://www.supremecourt.uk/press-summary/uksc-2019-0046.html [9] (n 4). [10] BTI 2014 LLC v Sequana SA [2022] UKSC 25… [read post]
7 Jun 2022, 11:45 am
In Chandler v Cape plc [2012] EWCA Civ 525, [69], Arden LJ ‘……emphatically reject[ed] any suggestion that this court [was] in any way concerned with what is usually referred to as piercing the corporate veil. [read post]
1 Apr 2022, 7:43 am
Mr Murray held he was bound by the decision in Meguerditchian v Lightbound [1917] 2 KB 298 and the Court of Appeal decision in Gavin Edmondson Solicitors Ltd v Haven Insurance Co Ltd [2015] EWCA Civ 1230 that held a lien does not arise where compensation is obtained without the need to issue proceedings. [read post]
30 Mar 2022, 2:19 am
The Secretary of State agreed, at least in the sort of ‘exceptional’ situation set out by him. [read post]
2 Feb 2022, 3:22 am
The appellants argued specific statutory rights are not to be cut down by subordinate legislation passed under the vires of a different Act, a rule identified in the case of R v Secretary of State for Social Security, Ex p Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants [1997] 1 WLR 275 (“JCWI”). [read post]
22 Sep 2021, 4:47 am
The Secretary of State refused the appellant’s asylum claim. [read post]
25 Jun 2021, 3:48 am
The majority of the Court (Lord Lloyd-Jones, Lady Arden and Lord Burrows) allow Libya’s appeal on the first issue. [read post]
5 May 2021, 9:07 am
In Gulati v. [read post]
2 May 2021, 4:46 pm
United States USA today had a piece “Newsmax apologizes for airing false allegations against Dominion worker, who drops company from suit”. [read post]
30 Apr 2021, 7:52 am
Ltd v Knight Steamship Co. [read post]
29 Apr 2021, 4:33 am
Google reviewed the relevant case law on CPR 19.6(1), arguing that the authorities (in particular, Emerald Supplies Ltd v British Airways plc [2011] Ch 345 and Rendlesham Estates plc. v Barr Ltd [2015] 1 WLR 3663) supported its position. [read post]
31 Mar 2021, 1:45 am
Lady Arden gave a concurring judgment. [read post]
14 Dec 2020, 11:52 am
Lady Arden gave a concurring judgment. [read post]
30 Nov 2020, 1:00 am
The proposed panel for hand-down is Lord Reed, Lord Hodge, Lord Lloyd-Jones, Lady Arden, and Lord Leggatt. [read post]
23 Nov 2020, 1:00 am
The proposed panel for hand-down is Lord Carnwath, Lady Black, Lady Arden, Lord Kitchin, and Lord Sales. [read post]
