Search for: "Miller v. Deal"
Results 201 - 220
of 1,118
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
18 Sep 2019, 1:18 am
It is noted by him that this principle has not been developed to the same degree in Scotland as it may have been south of the border. 1544: Aidan O’Neill QC states that there is no ‘No-deal’ statute. 1542: Lady Hale states that there is always a difficulty faced by the courts as to whether the court should accept the agreement of the parties (referring to the Miller case). [read post]
17 Sep 2019, 1:26 am
However in so far as they seek to declare it “null” and of “no effect” he submits that they went too far and where they cannot go. 14:16: Lord Keen QC notes that this principle is consistent with extensive authority and which Sir James Eadie QC will address in due course in further detail. 14:14: Lord Keen QC notes that the Inner House accepted that the principle of non-justiciability exists in public law and that the question of whether something is… [read post]
16 Sep 2019, 4:30 am
The works are targeted at a general audience and deal with subject matter readily understandable by any ordinary person, including the Court. [read post]
11 Sep 2019, 9:18 am
Aurelius Investment, LLC Miller v. [read post]
5 Sep 2019, 12:49 am
Aidan O’Neill QC argues that Parliament would therefore need to pass a separate piece of legislation to allow the UK Government to leave on a no deal basis. 1436: Aidan O’Neill QC submits that the notification under Article 50, to which Parliament consented following the case of R (Miller) v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union does not mean that Parliament consented to a no deal Brexit. [read post]
4 Sep 2019, 12:03 pm
Boundary Line Dispute In Newton The case is Miller v. [read post]
3 Sep 2019, 10:29 am
Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s decision to prorogue the UK Parliament last week reminded us of Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s twice-proroguing of the Canadian Parliament in the space of about a year. [read post]
3 Sep 2019, 12:41 am
He refers to R (on the application of Miller and another) v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union [2017] UKSC 5, noting it is consistent with the UK Government position. 1449: David Johnston QC refers to the Fixed Term Parliaments Act 2011 in accordance with which dissolution must take place. [read post]
2 Sep 2019, 9:09 am
In England & Wales, Gina Millar, the businesswoman who brought the UK Supreme Court appeal of R (on the application of Miller and another) v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union [2017] UKSC 5 has also commenced proceedings, with a hearing fixed for Thursday 5 September 2019. [read post]
28 Aug 2019, 8:52 am
IOW, LLC v. [read post]
25 Aug 2019, 8:41 am
In the uncited Best Western v. [read post]
21 Aug 2019, 8:51 pm
Union of Medical Marijuana Patients, Inc. v. [read post]
20 Aug 2019, 7:48 am
Miller, 812 S.E.2d 692 (2018). [read post]
19 Aug 2019, 1:31 pm
Icon at Panorama, LLC v. [read post]
5 Aug 2019, 3:23 pm
However, in the recent Marchand v. [read post]
31 Jul 2019, 9:01 pm
For this we fast forward seven years to the 2005 case of Miller-El v. [read post]
23 Jul 2019, 7:29 am
In Miller v. [read post]
22 Jul 2019, 10:26 am
Hours later, President-Elect Trump tweeted, ‘Great move on delay (by V. [read post]
16 Jul 2019, 7:42 am
Co. v. [read post]
15 Jul 2019, 4:54 am
Importantly, Chapter V of the GDPR authorizes only three methods for legal data transfers from the EEA to a third country, such as the United States: adequacy decisions, appropriate safeguards or limited enumerated exceptions (“derogations”). [read post]
