Search for: "State v. Dyson" Results 201 - 220 of 273
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
16 May 2011, 1:13 pm by Blog Editorial
R (Cart) v The Upper Tribunal; Eba v Advocate General for Scotland (Scotland); and R (MR (Pakistan)) v Secretary of State for the Home Department, heard 14 – 17 March 2011. [read post]
9 May 2011, 2:03 am by Blog Editorial
There are two appeals in the Privy Council this week to be heard by Lords Phillips, Brown, Mance, Kerr and Dyson. [read post]
28 Apr 2011, 3:18 pm by Bexis
 At least the state of the art at the time of the plaintiff’s use applies – unknown and later discovered risks are irrelevant. [read post]
10 Apr 2011, 4:36 pm by Blog Editorial
The case of Parkwood Leisure Limited v Alemo-Herron and others will be heard from Wednesday 13 to Thursday 14 April 2011, also by Lords Hope, Walker, Brown, Kerr and Dyson. [read post]
8 Apr 2011, 12:00 am by Samantha Knights, Matrix.
Fourthly, there was a side debate about whether the summary of the Hardial Singh principles in R (I) v SSHD [2002] EWCA Civ 888 by Dyson LJ (as he then was) was accurate. [read post]
3 Apr 2011, 11:31 pm by Blog Editorial
  First, on Monday 4 and Tuesday 5 April 2011, Lord Rodger, Lady Hale, Lords Brown, Kerr and Dyson will hear R (McDonald) v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea. [read post]
31 Mar 2011, 9:50 am by Kathryn Noble, Olswang
Supreme Court The main issue for the Supreme Court (Lords Phillips, Rodger, Collins, Clarke and Dyson) to decide was whether the First and Second Complaints were based on the same grounds, such that the general principle that the same cause should not be brought against somebody twice (nemo debet bis vexari pro una et eadem causa) was engaged. [read post]
29 Mar 2011, 10:00 pm by Rosalind English
Lumba v Secretary of State for the Home Deparment – a case of driving government policy further underground? [read post]
27 Mar 2011, 3:29 am by Blog Editorial
On Monday 28 March, Peter Stewart v The Queen will be heard by Lord Rodger, Lady Hale, Lords Brown, Kerr and Dyson. [read post]
23 Mar 2011, 3:43 am by Adam Wagner
Lord Dyson said: [T]here was a deliberate decision taken at the highest level to conceal the policy that was being applied and to apply a policy which, to put it at its lowest, the Secretary of State and her senior officials knew was vulnerable to legal challenge. [read post]
20 Mar 2011, 5:31 am by Blog Editorial
On Monday 21 and Tuesday 22 March, Lords Hope, Rodger, Brown, Kerr and Dyson will hear the devoluation appeal of Fraser v Her Majesty’s Advocate. [read post]
13 Mar 2011, 1:41 pm by Blog Editorial
This week there are three linked appeals to be heard in the Supreme Court from Monday 14 March to Thursday 17 March 2011 by Lords Phillips, Hope and Rodger, Lady Hale and Lords Clarke, Brown and Dyson: R (Cart) v The Upper Tribunal; Eba  v Advocate General for Scotland (Scotland); and R (MR (Pakistan)) v Secretary of State for the Home Department. [read post]
13 Mar 2011, 12:42 pm by Nicholas Gibson, Matrix.
The Court of Appeal rejected the argument of the Secretary of the State that Parliament by the 2007 Act had taken a policy decision to place the Upper Tribunal wholly beyond the reach of judicial review. [read post]
6 Mar 2011, 12:29 pm by Blog Editorial
Meanwhile in Courtroom 3, there are three murder cases listed in the Privy Council this week each to be heard by Lords Rodger, Brown, Kerr, Clarke and Dyson. [read post]
24 Jan 2011, 7:45 am
David concluded with a poll of participants as to whether the vacuum cleaner products of Dyson and Vax (which you can view here) were made to the same design, explaining how the judge in Dyson v Vax approached the comparison between them, factoring in the criterion of functionality and its effect upon design. [read post]
3 Dec 2010, 4:56 pm by INFORRM
After all, as he House of Lords observed in R v Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex parte Simms [2000] 2 AC 115, freedom of expression is a right without “an effective rule of law is not possible”. [read post]
3 Dec 2010, 12:21 am by 1 Crown Office Row
The panel consisted of Lords Phillips, Rodger, Walker and Brown and Sir John Dyson. [read post]
1 Dec 2010, 9:59 pm by Matthew Flinn
After all, as he House of Lords observed in R v Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex parte Simms [2000] 2 AC 115, freedom of expression is a right without “an effective rule of law is not possible”. [read post]
1 Dec 2010, 4:35 pm by INFORRM
The panel consisted of Lords Phillips, Rodger, Walker and Brown and Sir John Dyson. [read post]