Search for: "Clark v. Secretary of State"
Results 181 - 200
of 369
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
21 Nov 2020, 4:11 pm
Clarke v Nursing and Midwifery Council of New South Wales [2020] NSWDC 641 Scotting DCJ dismissed claims for libel based on an email and other matters. [read post]
9 Nov 2010, 9:59 pm
In respect of the former, he noted that s.1(3) of the National Health Services Act 2006 and the Secretary of States’ National Framework Document [46-49] provided that eligibility for NHS treatment was based on an individual’s assessed needs, and not on an ability to pay. [read post]
20 Apr 2012, 9:16 am
When the UK Justice Secretary Ken Clarke pointed out the error in May’s example, he was crushed beneath a band wagon of right-wing indignation. [read post]
27 Feb 2011, 7:33 pm
State v. [read post]
Case Comment: R (ZH and CN) v London Borough of Newham and London Borough of Lewisham [2014] UKSC 62
14 May 2015, 1:59 am
Lord Hodge (with whom Lords Clarke, Wilson and Toulson agreed) held that the licences granted to ZH and CN were not licences to occupy premises as a dwelling. [read post]
15 May 2017, 12:12 pm
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit heard oral argument today in Hawaii v. [read post]
2 Jul 2018, 1:00 am
R (Hallam) v Secretary of State for Justice; R (Nealon) v Secretary of State for Justice, heard 8-9 May 2018. [read post]
16 Aug 2020, 5:51 am
Clarke and Molly Saltskog discussed how the United States should react to Beijing and Tehran’s new partnership. [read post]
17 Feb 2014, 2:49 am
A v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Scotland), heard 22 – 23 January 2014. [read post]
20 Feb 2012, 5:22 am
PP v Secretary of State for the Home Department, (formerly VV [Jordan]), PP v SSHD, W & BB v SSHD and Z, G, U & Y v SSHD, heard 30 – 31 January 2012. [read post]
28 Feb 2011, 12:31 am
Second, the Supreme Court will in the near future decide a case on the subject of compensation for miscarriage of justice in the case of R (Adams) v Secretary of State for Justice. [read post]
27 Oct 2018, 5:53 am
Stephanie Zable analyzed the Supreme Court ruling in Dimaya v. [read post]
16 Feb 2024, 6:30 am
See, e.g., Lochner v. [read post]
1 Nov 2014, 3:09 am
ET AL. v. [read post]
21 Sep 2015, 5:38 pm
TERRY, Appellant, v. [read post]
9 Jan 2011, 7:31 am
Emcare, Inc., 444 F.3d 403, 409-12 (5th Cir.2006) (finding § 541.304‘s language is ambiguous and resorting to DOL for interpretative guidance); Clark v. [read post]
24 Dec 2020, 8:30 am
Barr v. [read post]
14 Feb 2011, 10:59 pm
The secretary of state must now reconsider “with an open mind”. [read post]
27 Jul 2006, 4:51 am
McKerr v United Kingdom, at para. 111). [read post]
27 Nov 2012, 2:03 am
Medellin v. [read post]
