Search for: "Lord v. State"
Results 2481 - 2500
of 4,051
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
26 Mar 2012, 8:31 am
On Monday 26 March 2012 are the appeals from the Supreme Court of Mauritius of Dookee v The State of Mauritius and anor and Sakoor Patel and ors v Anandsing Beenessreesing and Sicom Ltd. [read post]
26 Mar 2012, 6:52 am
In Simao v. [read post]
26 Mar 2012, 6:16 am
JD (Congo) and others v Secretary of State for the Home Department, Public Law Project [2012] EWCA Civ 327. [read post]
23 Mar 2012, 6:44 pm
Bourhis v. [read post]
23 Mar 2012, 7:22 am
Assocs., 182 N.J. 210, 225 (2005) (quoting 23 Williston on Contracts § 63:22, at 513-14 (Lord ed. 2002)). [read post]
23 Mar 2012, 12:00 am
JD (Congo) and others v Secretary of State for the Home Department, Public Law Project [2012] EWCA Civ 327 The Court of Appeal has considered the test for the second stage of appeal in immigration cases, when someone wishes to appeal from the Upper Tribunal to the Court of Appeal. [read post]
22 Mar 2012, 6:47 am
The source stated that the police officer “could be” the claimant and that he had reported this to the police. [read post]
22 Mar 2012, 6:47 am
V. [read post]
22 Mar 2012, 4:56 am
” The same point was made by Lord Justice Clerk Hope in Househill v Neilson, (1843) 1 WPC 673, 683, one of the earliest subject matter cases, concerning Neilson's invention of the hot-blast furnace, when he noted that the “main merit” of the invention may consist in “the discovery of the principle in science, or of the law of nature, stated in the patent. [read post]
22 Mar 2012, 2:59 am
Kennedy v. [read post]
21 Mar 2012, 11:28 am
Lord Carlile and others v Secretary of State for the Home Department – read judgment The High Court has upheld an order by the Home Secretary preventing Maryam Rajavi, a prominent Iranian dissident, from speaking in Parliament. [read post]
21 Mar 2012, 10:28 am
The source stated that the police officer “could be” the claimant and that he had reported this to the police. [read post]
21 Mar 2012, 10:22 am
The source stated that the police officer “could be” the claimant and that he had reported this to the police. [read post]
21 Mar 2012, 12:07 am
In R (Lord Carlile of Berriew CBE QC and others) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2012] EWHC 617 (Admin), the Divisional Court upheld, with evident reluctance, the Home Secretary’s decision to exclude Maryam Rajavi, “an eminent dissident Iranian politician”, from the UK – denying her the opportunity from meeting in the Palace of Westminster with 16 prominent cross-party members of the House of Lords and the House of Commons to… [read post]
20 Mar 2012, 5:29 pm
Kennedy v. [read post]
20 Mar 2012, 7:05 am
Corby BC v Scott & West Kent Housing Association v Haycraft [2012] EWCA Civ 276 are the first cases that have required the Court of Appeal to consider and apply the guidance given in Powell v Hounslow LBC [2011] UKSC 8 & Pinnock v Manchester CC [2010] UKSC 45 (our notes here & here). [read post]
20 Mar 2012, 7:05 am
Corby BC v Scott & West Kent Housing Association v Haycraft [2012] EWCA Civ 276 are the first cases that have required the Court of Appeal to consider and apply the guidance given in Powell v Hounslow LBC [2011] UKSC 8 & Pinnock v Manchester CC [2010] UKSC 45 (our notes here & here). [read post]
20 Mar 2012, 12:05 am
The law of nuisance is superior to most state-based initiatives, not because it is organic and home-grown as such, but because it secures our sense of mutual accommodation by allowing individuals to calculate how far they can use their surrounding resources without denigrating the value of their neighbour’s property. [read post]
19 Mar 2012, 5:42 am
Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) R. v SVS Solicitors [2012] EWCA Crim 319 (15 February 2012) A v B & Anor [2012] EWCA Civ 285 (14 March 2012) Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Maqsood v Mahmood & Anor [2012] EWCA Civ 251 (13 March 2012) JD (Congo) & Ors v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2012] EWCA Civ 327 (16 March 2012) Barr & Ors v Biffa Waste Services Ltd [2012] EWCA Civ 312 (19 March 2012) High Court… [read post]
19 Mar 2012, 3:51 am
Finally, after the conclusion of the judgment, the Court added a ‘postscript’ expressing concern at the recent re-statement by the ECtHR in X v Latvia (App no 27853/09) that Hague Convention cases demanded an in-depth examination of the entire family situation (as initially expressed, controversially, in Neulinger and Shuruk v Switzerland [2011] 1 FLR 122), and stating its conviction that such an in-depth examination is not required either by the terms of the… [read post]
