Search for: "Giles v. State" Results 221 - 240 of 435
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
19 Feb 2015, 1:44 pm by Giles Peaker
Best, R (On the Application Of) v The Secretary of State for Justice (Rev 1) [2015] EWCA Civ 17 The Court of Appeal considered the clash of s.144 LASPO and the rules on adverse possession, on appeal from the Administrative Court. [read post]
13 Feb 2015, 1:21 pm
  The State’s suggestion, p. 18 pf the reply brief, that the statement’s “primary purpose” is not prosecutorial because it was informal should be rejected on grounds already indicated in Davis v. [read post]
13 Feb 2015, 1:21 pm
  The State’s suggestion, p. 18 pf the reply brief, that the statement’s “primary purpose” is not prosecutorial because it was informal should be rejected on grounds already indicated in Davis v. [read post]
8 Feb 2015, 11:59 am by Giles Peaker
MR v North Tyneside Council and Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (Housing and council tax benefits : other) [2015] UKUT 34 (AAC) The FTT in this case had found that the tenant was entitled to an ‘extra’ bedroom, as under a shared residence order, her son spent alternate weeks with her. [read post]
4 Feb 2015, 1:27 pm by Giles Peaker
The post Nuisance and reasonable steps by Giles Peaker appeared first on Nearly Legal: Housing Law News and Comment. [read post]
26 Jan 2015, 1:12 pm
Giles White shared his experience from being a law-firm practitioner to a general counsel. [read post]
17 Jan 2015, 5:06 pm by Giles Peaker
  Nzau v Gani, Croydon County Court, 21 November 2013 Private tenancy commencing in late 2006. [read post]
3 Jan 2015, 9:56 am by Giles Peaker
Regas, R (On the Application Of) v London Borough of Enfield [2014] EWHC 4173 (Admin) Mr Regas is a landlord with a single property in Enfield. [read post]
28 Dec 2014, 4:12 pm by Giles Peaker
These were questions in Lawal & Anor v Circle 33 Housing Trust [2014] EWCA Civ 1514. [read post]
15 Dec 2014, 2:38 pm by Giles Peaker
The post Not quite, Minister by Giles Peaker appeared first on Nearly Legal: Housing Law News and Comment. [read post]
7 Dec 2014, 6:06 am by Giles Peaker
SSWP v David Nelson and Fife Council, SSWP v James Nelson and Fife Council [2014] UKUT 0525 (AAC) And the upshot? [read post]
7 Dec 2014, 12:02 am by rhapsodyinbooks
And while Jefferson continued to insist, even when retired, that the federal and state governments represented two independent and equal sovereigns, Marshall, in McCulloch v. [read post]
25 Nov 2014, 3:29 pm by Giles Peaker
Rather unusually, faced with one of the most coruscating High Court judgments I can recall, in AA V LB Southwark [our report here], the senior officers of Southwark Council have chosen to do neither. [read post]
21 Nov 2014, 9:30 pm by Karen Tani
 From PQ Monthly: Oregon State Bar Unveils Diversity & Inclusion Story Wall.From History News Network: Harlow Giles Unger on "Why Naming John Marshall Chief Justice Was John Adams’s 'Greatest Gift' to the Nation. [read post]
15 Nov 2014, 2:29 pm by Giles Peaker
On A1 P1, though, Mr S ran into the problem that his tenancy agreement stated "100. [read post]
7 Nov 2014, 5:52 am
  By our count, federal judges have trampled over state sovereignty with respect to the heeding presumption in no fewer than eleven states – Alaska, Colorado (despite contrary state-court authority), Georgia, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Kentucky, Maine, New York (despite contrary state-court authority), South Dakota, and Wyoming.Finally, because various states have taken quite different approaches to whether a heeding presumption exists at all and… [read post]
6 Nov 2014, 1:23 pm by Giles Peaker
In the Secretary of State’s view, qualification criteria form part of an allocation scheme. [read post]
23 Oct 2014, 3:41 pm by Giles Peaker
Cotton & Ors, R (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions & Ors [2014] EWHC 3437 (Admin) This was the Liberty backed judicial review of the bedroom tax regulations on the basis that the regulations amounted to an article 8 breach, or an article 14 breach read with article 8, or that the regulations were irrational. [read post]