Search for: "Lord v. State"
Results 2221 - 2240
of 3,575
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
9 Jul 2011, 5:50 pm
The Convention is a constitutional instrument of European public order (see Loizidou v. [read post]
15 May 2008, 9:58 am
State of Indiana (NFP) Lord Drezden v. [read post]
5 Apr 2012, 8:06 am
Lord Justice Rix is driving forward the scheme as part of the Master of the Rolls Lord Neuberger’s aim to revitalise the CAMS scheme. [read post]
9 Feb 2010, 12:42 am
” Giving judgment in Welwyn Hatfield Council v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government and Beesley [2010] EWCA Civ 26, Mummery LJ said Beesley told the council he proposed to build a new hay barn on the land, that no change of use was required and provision for sewage disposal was not needed. [read post]
4 Dec 2023, 2:21 am
The Data Protection and Digital Information Bill has passed through the House of Commons and will now proceed to the House of Lords for consideration. [read post]
15 Apr 2018, 4:02 pm
The judgment was given by Lord Reed NPJ. [read post]
30 Aug 2008, 7:29 pm
Parliament enacted a provision for compensating victims of crimes, with a clause empowering the Secretary of State to bring it into force. [read post]
4 Apr 2011, 7:08 am
Tollett [(1817) 2 Starkie 37], the rule was stated by Lord Ellenborough, at p. [read post]
2 Aug 2023, 2:14 am
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, with Lord Justice Arnold giving the leading judgment and Lord Justice Stuart-Smith and Lady Justice Falk in agreement. [read post]
13 Jun 2019, 1:06 pm
Passing OffGuestKat Alex Woolgar summarised the short but sweet judgment from Lord Justice Floyd in Media Agency Group Limited and Transport Media Limited v Space Media Agency Limited and Ors [2019] EWCA Civ 712 that overturned a rather generous first instance finding of passing off through cybersquatting.Publications and General MattersAnnsley Merelle Ward provided a nice write-up in anticipation of a new IBIL publication entitled The Sir… [read post]
22 Jun 2014, 5:31 pm
A Parliamentary Privilege (Defamation) Bill prepared by Lord Lester QC has been introduced in the House of Lords. [read post]
19 Sep 2019, 10:01 am
The constitutional importance of this point is clear: in R (on the application of Bancoult) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, which was cited by Lord Pannick on behalf of Gina Miller during his oral submissions, Lord Hoffmann held that ‘the unique authority Parliament derives from its representative character’. [read post]
19 Mar 2020, 6:18 am
”); United States v. [read post]
18 Jun 2011, 2:53 am
Both cases follow Cadder v HMA [2010] UKSC 43 which involved a detainee being interviewed by the police without access to legal advice. [read post]
20 Feb 2010, 5:05 am
It is of course “a disgrace to the law”, as was said in the Court of King’s Bench by Lord Tenterden CJ in The King v Somerton (1827) 7 B&C 463 at pp 466-467, “that criminals should be allowed to escape by nice and captious objections of form”. [read post]
28 Dec 2022, 3:50 am
Periods of loosening include the 1990s when the approach to standing was increasingly liberalized, exemplified by R. v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs ex p. [read post]
28 Oct 2009, 10:59 am
The "E-meter" itself is said to cost anywhere from $900 for the Mark V up to $4,650 for the "Mark VII Super Quantum E-meter," which is apparently similar to the Mark V but with super quantum abilities. [read post]
18 Jun 2011, 2:53 am
Both cases follow Cadder v HMA [2010] UKSC 43 which involved a detainee being interviewed by the police without access to legal advice. [read post]
2 Apr 2011, 5:47 pm
In Thornton v Telegraph Media Group Ltd [2010] EWHC 1414 (QB) Tugendhat J referred to the judgment of the House of Lords in Sim v Stretch ([1936] 2 All ER 1237) and to the judgment of Sharp J in Ecclestone v Telegraph Media Group Ltd ([2009] EWHC 2779 (QB)) and held that, “whatever definition of ‘defamatory’ is adopted, it must include a qualification or threshold of seriousness, so as to exclude trivial claims” [89]. [read post]
20 Feb 2012, 2:30 am
It’s because he or she thinks they can get away with it.“ The BBC has responded to an article in the Daily Mail which claimed that the BBC spent £4m laying off staff, but half the employees continued working as normal. “This article is inaccurate and misrepresents the facts” the corporation stated, as reported by Tabloid Watch here. [read post]
