Search for: "Lord v. State -" Results 241 - 260 of 4,026
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
23 Feb 2018, 1:21 am by ELLIOT GOLD
Lord Neuberger similarly stated that courts should “bear clearly in mind” the need to interpret the duty in a way which does not impose an impossible or disproportionate burden on the police. [read post]
28 Jun 2017, 2:24 am by Matrix Legal Support Service
 The Appeal Court failed to draw a distinction between the threat from other prisoners, and the conduct for which the state was responsible, whereas the correct legal test when the threat comes from the acts of third parties is whether the state has failed to provide reasonable protection against harm inflicted by non-state agents. [read post]
12 Mar 2012, 5:19 am by Laura Sandwell, Matrix.
PP v Secretary of State for the Home Department, (formerly VV [Jordan]), PP v SSHD, W & BB v SSHD and Z, G, U & Y v SSHD, heard 30 – 31 January 2012. [read post]
10 Jul 2011, 2:02 pm by Blog Editorial
R (on the application of Quila and another) (FC) v Secretary of State for the Home Department and R (on the application of Bibi and another) (FC) v Secretary of State for the Home Department, heard 8 – 9 June 2011. [read post]
I spend the morning reading into Privy Council case of Hunte and another v The State, a miscarriage of justice case from Trinidad and Tobago that is starting next week. [read post]
22 May 2011, 12:00 pm by Blog Editorial
The following judgments are to be handed down in the Supreme Court on Wednesday 25 May 2011: FA (Iraq) (FC) v Secretary of State for the Home Department, heard 23 – 24 February 2011 (our case preview is here) Shepherd Masimba Kambadzi (also known as SK (Zimbabwe)) (FC) v Secretary of State for the Home Department, heard 10 – 11 February 2011 Fraser v Her Majesty’s Advocate, heard 21 – 22 March 2011 (here is our case preview) … [read post]
28 Nov 2018, 2:17 am by Matrix Legal Support Service
The Supreme Court by a majority of 4 to 1 (Lord Hughes dissenting) dismissed MM’s appeal. [read post]
20 Apr 2016, 2:00 am by Matrix Legal Support Service
In regards to the proportionality argument, Lord Clarke stated that, in this case, the absence of a specified time limit for detention does not infringe the principles in R v Governor of Durham Prison, Ex P Hardial Singh [1984] 1 WLR 704. [read post]
28 Jan 2011, 6:11 am
He held (at paragraph 26) that this approach was wrong, thus overruling the decision in GW v. [read post]
17 Nov 2015, 2:00 am by James Johnson
The Supreme CourtThe Supreme Court appeal will be heard by a panel of five, comprised of Lord Neuberger, Lord Mance, Lord Clarke, Lord Sumption and Lord Hodge. [read post]
14 Oct 2015, 2:56 am by Matrix Legal Information Team
The High Court and the Court of Appeal declined to set aside the consent order on the basis that Mr Sharland would not have made a substantially different order in the financial proceedings, applying the decision of the House of Lords in Livesey (formerly Jenkins) v Jenkins [1985] AC 424. [read post]
16 Oct 2011, 5:14 am by Hugh Tomlinson QC, Matrix Law
It has been forcefully argued that the decision of the Court of Appeal is inconsistent with the decision of the House of Lords in Jameel v Wall Street Journal ([2007] 1 AC 359).  [read post]
16 Oct 2011, 5:14 am by Hugh Tomlinson QC, Matrix Law
   This is only the second time that the highest court has considered the application of the “responsible publication in the public interest”, first established by the House of Lords in Reynolds v Times Newspapers ([2001] 2 AC 127) nearly 12 years ago. [read post]
3 Apr 2011, 11:31 pm by Blog Editorial
  First, on Monday 4 and Tuesday 5 April 2011, Lord Rodger, Lady Hale, Lords Brown, Kerr and Dyson will hear R (McDonald) v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea. [read post]
19 Jun 2014, 1:25 pm
. -- then imagine what it's like in a state prison.Why read Lord of the Flies when you can get a similar, nonfictional recitation from the Ninth Circuit. [read post]
28 May 2012, 9:07 am by INFORRM
The appeal by way of case stated in the “Twitter joke” case (Chambers v DPP) was heard on 8 February 2012 and judgment was reserved. [read post]
10 Jul 2017, 2:46 am by ASAD KHAN
As demonstrated by Mamatkulov v Turkey (2005) 41 EHRR 25, DFAL’s criterion of serious irreversible harm shows some intersection with the ECtHR’s application of rule 39 relief. [read post]
11 Jun 2013, 4:05 am by Howard Friedman
Supreme Court's landmark decision in School District of Abington Township, Pennsylvania v. [read post]
23 Jun 2014, 10:04 pm by Ed. Microjuris.com Puerto Rico
Bruce Lord Wilder Freedom of Speech in the United States from The Federalist to McCutcheon v. [read post]
31 Oct 2007, 7:58 am
In a series of decisions - Secretary of State for the Home Department v. [read post]