Search for: "State v. London"
Results 221 - 240
of 3,572
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
7 Oct 2008, 8:06 am
This is thought to be the first claim brought in the UK for damages based on the cause of action developed by the ECJ in the case of Köbler v Republik Österreich (Case C-224/01).The claim concerned two judgments of the Court of Appeal of 1999 and 2000, in which the Council for the Protection of Rural England, of which the claimant was a trustee of the London branch, had been refused judicial review of decisions by local authorities in London (R. v… [read post]
4 Jan 2007, 2:12 am
State courts have also taken up the challenge, the biggest development in 2006 being the City of Norwood v. [read post]
15 Mar 2011, 3:00 am
But in Aaron v. [read post]
31 Mar 2011, 4:08 am
Supreme Court Duncombe & Ors v Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families [2011] UKSC 14 (29 March 2011) Jones v Kaney [2011] UKSC 13 (29 March 2011) Lumba (WL) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2011] UKSC 12 (23 March 2011) Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Folgate London Market Ltd v Chaucer Insurance Plc [2011] EWCA Civ 328 (31 March 2011) W (Children) [2011] EWCA Civ 345 (30 March 2011) Societe… [read post]
16 Oct 2007, 2:19 am
Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Austin & Anor v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis [2007] EWCA Civ 989 (15 October 2007) L’Oreal SA & Ors v Bellure NV & Ors [2007] EWCA Civ 968 (10 October 2007) Holmes-Moorhouse v London Borough of Richmond-Upon-Thames [2007] EWCA Civ 970 (10 October 2007) Procter & Gamble Company v Reckitt Benckiser (UK) Ltd [2007] EWCA Civ 936 (10 October 2007) Charman v Orion… [read post]
16 Apr 2015, 4:41 am
However, the Secretary of State indicated that 16 zones and agglomerations in the UK, including Greater London, could not be realistically met by 1 January 2015, and some could not even be expected to be achieved by 2025. [read post]
13 Oct 2017, 5:01 am
Reasonable expectations of privacy in voyeurism cases under the Canadian Criminal Code: London’s case of R. v. [read post]
23 Jul 2012, 6:44 am
Court of Appeal (Civil Division) The Trademark Licensing Co Ltd & Anor v Leofelis SA [2012] EWCA Civ 985 (23 July 2012) Faraday Reinsurance Co Ltd v Howden North America Inc & Anor [2012] EWCA Civ 980 (20 July 2012) O’Cathail v Transport for London [2012] EWCA Civ 1004 (20 July 2012) Michael & Ors v South Wales Police & Anor [2012] EWCA Civ 981 (20 July 2012) Konodyba v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea [2012] EWCA Civ… [read post]
6 Jul 2009, 6:41 am
In a recent decision of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, Cooke & Partners, Ltd. v. [read post]
10 Dec 2013, 7:35 am
This did not extend to a right of access to information held by the State when the State was not willing to provide it. [read post]
17 Jun 2010, 3:41 pm
Qurat-Ul-Ain Zia v Mourtada Central London County Court 09/02/2010 This case in Central London County Court has been reported briefly in Legal Action [but we have had the transcript - NL]. [read post]
17 Jun 2010, 3:41 pm
Qurat-Ul-Ain Zia v Mourtada Central London County Court 09/02/2010 This case in Central London County Court has been reported briefly in Legal Action [but we have had the transcript - NL]. [read post]
9 Oct 2019, 7:21 am
The courts are also disinclined to decide Article 14 cases on the basis that the comparators are not in an analogous situation other than in very obvious cases: see R (Carson) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [2005] UKHL 37. [read post]
21 Dec 2008, 9:56 am
What Doherty v Birmingham City Council (Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government intervening) [2008] UKHL 57 actually means for a public law defence to possession claims, particularly summary possession, was the subject of London Borough of Hillingdon v Collins & Another [2008] EWHC 3016 (Admin). [read post]
26 Jul 2011, 12:17 pm
The case is Cape Flattery, Ltd. v. [read post]
30 Jul 2010, 7:59 am
Goremsandu, R (on the application of) v London Borough of Harrow [2010] EWHC 1873 (Admin) As many of you will know the definition of an HMO for the purposes of Council Tax is totally different from that used in the Housing Act 2004 (and in relation to planning uses classes). [read post]
30 Jul 2010, 7:59 am
Goremsandu, R (on the application of) v London Borough of Harrow [2010] EWHC 1873 (Admin) As many of you will know the definition of an HMO for the purposes of Council Tax is totally different from that used in the Housing Act 2004 (and in relation to planning uses classes). [read post]
22 Dec 2009, 4:45 pm
The recent ruling falls in line with the 2005 decision by the Supreme Court in Kelo v. [read post]
15 Dec 2017, 4:13 pm
The claimant stated that this did not happen. [read post]
22 Oct 2011, 10:58 am
City of New London, 545 U.S. 469 (2005). [read post]
