Search for: "State v. Hale"
Results 181 - 200
of 974
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
22 Mar 2011, 12:33 pm
Lady Hale also agreed that the Court in Bressol did not accept the A-G’s reasoning. [read post]
19 Oct 2016, 2:34 am
Lady Hale gave the only substantive judgment, with which the other justices agreed. [read post]
17 Mar 2011, 9:15 pm
United States v. [read post]
16 Mar 2015, 8:35 am
Lady Hale at [99] noted that whilst the court would not always take the government’s word for it, foreign policy and national security were government business. [read post]
3 May 2007, 10:46 am
State of Indiana (NFP) Heather Hale v. [read post]
21 Sep 2015, 1:40 pm
be2 LLC v. [read post]
1 Mar 2013, 10:55 am
Shelby County v. [read post]
7 Jan 2019, 7:15 am
Sales LJ was unconvinced that the criteria set out in Ladd v Marshall [1954] EWCA Civ 1 – intended to reflect the balance of justice in relation to applications to admit fresh evidence – had not been satisfied and KV was unable to demonstrate that evidence such as Dr Cohen’s report could not have been obtained with reasonable diligence for use earlier. [read post]
24 Sep 2015, 4:30 am
The Secretary of State appealed to the Upper Tribunal. [read post]
19 Jan 2016, 8:36 am
A majority of the Supreme Court (Lady Hale dissenting) dismissed the appeal. [read post]
14 Dec 2008, 5:34 am
Other thoughts on the FTC v. [read post]
2 Jul 2019, 9:27 am
Lady Hale and Lord Kerr both gave dissenting judgments (Lady Hale as to outcome, though she agreed with Lord Wilson on the relevant legal principles to be applied; Lord Kerr dissented both on outcome and on the legal approach taken, specifically on the relevant test to be applied by the courts when considering the proportionality of a measure; though both agreed with certain parts of Lord Wilson’s judgment). [read post]
29 Jul 2015, 3:26 am
Lady Hale set out the terms of the reference to the court and stated in the view of the court, the principled solution to the case would be to treat the care component of DLA as an invalidity benefit for the purpose of the Council Regulation (EC) No 1408/71. [read post]
6 Jun 2008, 7:24 am
Rivers v. [read post]
8 Jun 2011, 2:21 pm
Shellee Hale, in which a blogger sought to use the state’s reporter shield law to enable her to refuse to reveal the source of information she posted on an internet message board. [read post]
26 Jan 2015, 4:00 am
(See Hale, supra, 183 Cal.App.4th at pp. 1383-1384; see generally Adams v. [read post]
24 May 2011, 8:40 am
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]
19 Apr 2016, 12:09 pm
They asked the Court to declare that one state cannot be haled into the courts of another state to answer for its official actions back home. [read post]
26 Aug 2011, 7:00 am
For example, in the recent case of Kasten v. [read post]
27 Apr 2020, 4:58 am
The majority In her judgment Lady Hale considered the developments that had taken place since the decision in Briody and the current state of the law in relation to surrogacy. [read post]
