Search for: "State v. Dyson" Results 181 - 200 of 273
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
16 Jul 2011, 10:00 pm by Rosalind English
And the Strasbourg Court has stated unambiguously that it regards the strictest institution permitted by UK law, the Special Immigration Appeals Commission (SIAC), to be a  ”fully independent court” which is best placed to ensure that no material was unnecessarily withheld from the detainee (A v United Kingdom 49 EHRR 695). [read post]
15 Jul 2011, 6:00 am by JA Hodnicki
Dyson School of Applied Economics and Management) describe The Impact of the New York State Retail Milk Price Regulation on Farm-to-Retail Price Transmission... [read post]
15 Jul 2011, 6:00 am by JA Hodnicki
Dyson School of Applied Economics and Management) describe The Impact of the New York State Retail Milk Price Regulation on Farm-to-Retail Price Transmission... [read post]
10 Jul 2011, 2:02 pm by Blog Editorial
R (on the application of Quila and another) (FC) v Secretary of State for the Home Department and R (on the application of Bibi and another) (FC) v Secretary of State for the Home Department, heard 8 – 9 June 2011. [read post]
9 Jul 2011, 9:28 am by Michael Scutt
Following the Supreme Court’s decision in R (on the application of G) v The Governors of School X probably  not if you’re a teacher in a state school. [read post]
8 Jul 2011, 5:02 am by Martin Downs
They also referred his case to the Secretary of State with a view to him being barred from working with children. [read post]
5 Jul 2011, 7:55 am by Oliver Gayner, Olswang
Global Process Systems v Syarikat Takaful Malaysia Berhad [2011] UKSC 5. [read post]
3 Jul 2011, 4:12 am by Blog Editorial
R (Quila & Anor) v Secretary of State for the Home Department and R (Bibi & Anor) v Secretary of State for the Home Department, heard 8 – 9 June 2011. [read post]
26 Jun 2011, 11:27 am by Blog Editorial
R (on the application of Quila and another) (FC) v Secretary of State for the Home Department and R (on the application of Bibi and another) (FC) v Secretary of State for the Home Department, heard 8 – 9 June 2011. [read post]
19 Jun 2011, 10:19 am by Blog Editorial
R (on the application of Quila and another) (FC) v Secretary of State for the Home Department and R (on the application of Bibi and another) (FC) v Secretary of State for the Home Department, heard 8 – 9 June 2011. [read post]
12 Jun 2011, 12:59 pm by Blog Editorial
R (Quila & Anor) v Secretary of State for the Home Department and R (Bibi & Anor) v Secretary of State for the Home Department, heard 8 – 9 June 2011. [read post]
10 Jun 2011, 8:45 am by Samantha Knights, Matrix.
  Both he and Lady Hale (at §70) cited D v Home Office [2006] 1 WLR 1003 apparently with approval which required a causation test as regards breaches of the 2001 Rules. [read post]
3 Jun 2011, 3:38 am by Mathew Purchase, Matrix.
At paragraph 134, it stated that: “It will be for the Respondent state to implement . . . appropriate general and/or individual measures to fulfil its obligations to secure the rights of the applications and other persons in their position to respect for their private life. [read post]
1 Jun 2011, 10:56 pm by Matthew Flinn
Lumba A similar question had been addressed by the court in R (Lumba) v Secrteary of State for the Home Department [2011] UKSC 12 – another case involving the detention of a foreign national prisoner. [read post]
30 May 2011, 11:37 pm by Aileen McColgan, Matrix.
The decision in McCaughey will not impose a Human Rights Act obligation on the state to investigate pre-commencement deaths, as had been argued in McKerr. [read post]
24 May 2011, 8:40 am by Cathyrn Hopkins, Olswang LLP
On 9 March 2011, the Supreme Court handed down its judgment in the joint appeal of Sienkiewicz v Grief (UK) Ltd; Knowsley MBC v Willmore [2011] UKSC 10. [read post]
23 May 2011, 10:19 am
They were: Ntuli v Donald [2010] EWCA Civ 1276 (set aside on appeal) and DFT v TFD [2010] EWHC 2335 (QB) (granted for seven days for anti-tipping-off reasons). [read post]
23 May 2011, 8:44 am by Edward Craven, Matrix Chambers.
This was the riddle that recently occupied a nine-judge panel of the Supreme Court in R (Adams) v Secretary of State for Justice [2011] UKSC 18. [read post]
22 May 2011, 12:00 pm by Blog Editorial
In Courtroom 1, Gale and another v Serious Organised Crime Agency is to be heard by Lords Phillips, Brown, Mance, Judge, Clarke, Dyson and Reed. [read post]