Search for: "LEVY V. LEVY" Results 2261 - 2280 of 3,418
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
18 Oct 2011, 8:50 am by Eoin Daly
 Although it was held in Byrne v Minister for Finance that article 35.5 does not prevent the imposition of a generally applicable income tax on judges, the previous Government concluded, in 2009, that it precluded the imposition on judges not only of the public sector pay cuts, but also, the pension levy. [read post]
18 Oct 2011, 8:32 am by Eoin Daly
 Although it was held in Byrne v Minister for Finance that article 35.5 does not prevent the imposition of a generally applicable income tax on judicial salaries, the previous Government concluded, in 2009, that it precluded the imposition on judges not only of the public sector pay cuts, but also, the pension levy. [read post]
17 Oct 2011, 10:00 pm by Rosalind English
 A merely philanthropic purpose, or purpose for the benefit of a private class, would lack this element of public benefit and would therefore not qualify as charitable (Oppenheim v. [read post]
16 Oct 2011, 11:56 pm by Fiona de Londras
This allows for the imposition of the pension levy on judges (the former Attorney General had felt the levy could not be imposed, although there is divided views on this). [read post]
On 6 July 2011, the UKSC delivered its judgment in Scottish Widows plc v Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs (Scotland); Scottish Widows plc No 2 v Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs (Scotland); Scottish Widows plc v Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs (Scotland) [2011] UKSC 32. [read post]
On 6 July 2011, the UKSC delivered its judgment in Scottish Widows plc v Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs (Scotland); Scottish Widows plc No 2 v Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs (Scotland); Scottish Widows plc v Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs (Scotland) [2011] UKSC 32. [read post]
10 Oct 2011, 2:33 pm by Abbott & Kindermann
In addition, the appellate court concurred in the analysis found in Buetz v. [read post]
7 Oct 2011, 4:18 am by Marie Louise
Hise (Technology & Marketing Law Blog) Supreme Court confirms that a download is not a performance: ASCAP v United States (1709 Copyright Blog) (Ars Technica) District Court S D New York: Court nukes another mass defendant file-sharing lawsuit: Digiprotect v Does (Technology & Marketing Law Blog) District Court E D Virginia calls out copyright trolls’ coercive business model, threaten sanctions K-Beech v Does 1–85 (EFF) (Ars Technica) District Court… [read post]