Search for: "Lord v. State"
Results 2041 - 2060
of 4,050
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
20 Dec 2013, 2:27 am
The judgments in R (Chester) v Secretary of State for Justice; R (McGeogh) v The Lord President of the Council and Another (Scotland) [2013] UKSC 63 were handed down in October 2013. [read post]
16 Dec 2013, 9:38 am
Regulation 2(1) states that:“The articles of association of a RTM company shall take the form, and include the provisions, set out in the Schedule to these Regulations. [read post]
16 Dec 2013, 9:38 am
Regulation 2(1) states that:“The articles of association of a RTM company shall take the form, and include the provisions, set out in the Schedule to these Regulations. [read post]
15 Dec 2013, 3:43 pm
Birmingham City Council v Balog [2013] EWCA Civ 1582A s.202 review decision on affordability was at the centre of this second appeal, brought by Birmingham after a s.204 appeal decision went against them. [read post]
15 Dec 2013, 3:43 pm
Birmingham City Council v Balog [2013] EWCA Civ 1582A s.202 review decision on affordability was at the centre of this second appeal, brought by Birmingham after a s.204 appeal decision went against them. [read post]
13 Dec 2013, 8:41 am
Further, in NDMC v. [read post]
12 Dec 2013, 4:00 am
[2] Cojocaru v. [read post]
10 Dec 2013, 11:53 am
Lack of assessment of features 'commonplace' in current papercut works DJ Clarke outlined the correct approach to be used in comparing artistic works, as that of Lord Hoffman in Designers Guild Ltd v Russell Williams (Textile) Ltd. [read post]
10 Dec 2013, 7:35 am
Lord Wilson stated that he could “countenance somewhat more readily than does Lord Brown” the possibility that refusal to disclose the requested information interfered with art 10. [read post]
5 Dec 2013, 2:55 am
A. v Secretary of State for the Home Department. [read post]
5 Dec 2013, 2:55 am
A. v Secretary of State for the Home Department. [read post]
3 Dec 2013, 7:59 am
SSHD, Lord Kerr stated, “in reaching decisions that will affect a child, a primacy of importance must be accorded to his or her best interests. [read post]
3 Dec 2013, 7:59 am
SSHD, Lord Kerr stated, “in reaching decisions that will affect a child, a primacy of importance must be accorded to his or her best interests. [read post]
3 Dec 2013, 7:16 am
In their explanatory blog post, the NRP draws parallels to the famous 1772 case of Somerset v. [read post]
28 Nov 2013, 6:27 am
Lord Sumption stated that this could not be the correct result stating: “The essential element in my view is not control of the environment in which the claimant is injured, but control over the claimant for the purpose of performing a function for which the defendant has assumed responsibility. [read post]
28 Nov 2013, 6:27 am
Lord Sumption stated that this could not be the correct result stating: “The essential element in my view is not control of the environment in which the claimant is injured, but control over the claimant for the purpose of performing a function for which the defendant has assumed responsibility. [read post]
27 Nov 2013, 7:38 pm
Against the background of the Provimi judgment (Provimi Ltd v. [read post]
27 Nov 2013, 2:20 am
The Court stated that its judgment does not favour sexual orientation over religious belief – had the respondents refused rooms to the appellants because of their Christian beliefs, the appellants would have been equally protected by the prohibition of discrimination. [read post]
27 Nov 2013, 2:20 am
The Court stated that its judgment does not favour sexual orientation over religious belief – had the respondents refused rooms to the appellants because of their Christian beliefs, the appellants would have been equally protected by the prohibition of discrimination. [read post]
26 Nov 2013, 3:30 pm
Notably, Lord Bingham’s judgment began:“A general public duty to house the homeless or provide for the destitute cannot be spelled out of article 3. [read post]
