Search for: "Tenant v. State"
Results 2561 - 2580
of 3,367
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
22 May 2010, 6:12 am
A secure tenant could abandon or withdraw application for right to buy otherwise than by service of written notice under s.122(3) - Copping v Surrey County Council [2006] HLR 307 - or may "abandon or waive his right to buy under normal principles of common law and equity or may be estopped from continuing to exercise it", Martin v Medina Housing Association Ltd [2006] HLR 763. [read post]
22 May 2010, 6:12 am
A secure tenant could abandon or withdraw application for right to buy otherwise than by service of written notice under s.122(3) - Copping v Surrey County Council [2006] HLR 307 - or may "abandon or waive his right to buy under normal principles of common law and equity or may be estopped from continuing to exercise it", Martin v Medina Housing Association Ltd [2006] HLR 763. [read post]
21 May 2010, 7:45 am
McLeod v. [read post]
21 May 2010, 7:45 am
Nelson v. [read post]
20 May 2010, 12:46 pm
In Baron v. [read post]
17 May 2010, 9:42 am
Mr E was a secure tenant of Lambeth. [read post]
17 May 2010, 9:42 am
Mr E was a secure tenant of Lambeth. [read post]
13 May 2010, 7:07 pm
Schoenfeld v. [read post]
13 May 2010, 3:26 am
The intent and purpose of the 1999 Order was set out effectively in R v Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions and Another, Ex Parte Spath Holme Limited which was referred to in the instant case. [read post]
13 May 2010, 3:26 am
The intent and purpose of the 1999 Order was set out effectively in R v Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions and Another, Ex Parte Spath Holme Limited which was referred to in the instant case. [read post]
12 May 2010, 10:21 am
The Ahmeds approached Mr Murphy in July 2008, stating that they wished to undertake extensive works of repair and refurbishment. [read post]
12 May 2010, 10:21 am
The Ahmeds approached Mr Murphy in July 2008, stating that they wished to undertake extensive works of repair and refurbishment. [read post]
10 May 2010, 2:13 pm
Allstate Ins Co. v. [read post]
10 May 2010, 1:16 pm
Click Here Beef slaughterhouse in Wash. state to pay $750,000. [read post]
7 May 2010, 5:25 am
To view a copy of the Appellate Division's decision, please follow this link: Arvins v. [read post]
6 May 2010, 10:00 am
” United States. v. [read post]
5 May 2010, 1:09 pm
See, e.g., United States v. [read post]
3 May 2010, 9:34 am
That's the part of the Bankruptcy Code that makes your phone stop ringing and lawsuits stop coming when you file a Chapter 7 or Chapter 13 bankruptcy in Arizona.It's a pretty complicated piece of legislation, and it's fundamentally different from the versions of stays which existed under the Bankruptcy Act (the version of the bankruptcy law that we had in the United States prior to what bankruptcy lawyers called the New Code prior to the 2005 Amendments. [read post]
30 Apr 2010, 4:22 pm
A letter was sent to Ms W stating the conclusion but giving no reasons. [read post]
30 Apr 2010, 4:22 pm
A letter was sent to Ms W stating the conclusion but giving no reasons. [read post]
