Search for: "State v. Borough" Results 241 - 260 of 1,265
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
20 Aug 2008, 8:23 am
Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) Hills, R. v [2008] EWCA Crim 1871 (17 July 2008) High Court (Administrative Court) Hiscox, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for Work & Pensions [2008] EWHC 1986 (Admin) (25 July 2008) Kinsley, R (on the application of) v Hendon Magistrates’ Court [2008] EWHC 2013 (Admin) (23 July 2008) S, R (on the application of) v Halton Borough Council & Anor [2008] EWHC 1982 (Admin)… [read post]
21 Aug 2008, 6:55 am
Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) Hills, R. v [2008] EWCA Crim 1871 (17 July 2008) High Court (Administrative Court) Hiscox, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for Work & Pensions [2008] EWHC 1986 (Admin) (25 July 2008) Kinsley, R (on the application of) v Hendon Magistrates' Court [2008] EWHC 2013 (Admin) (23 July 2008) S, R (on the application of) v Halton Borough Council & Anor [2008] EWHC 1982 (Admin) (21… [read post]
28 Aug 2014, 2:36 pm by Giles Peaker
They are not the only London council to consider five years residence requirement – so are LB Southwark – but their stated reason for the increase is specifically because: Increased costs in inner London combined with restrictions on housing benefit has resulted in more households moving to outer London boroughs like Barnet. [read post]
19 Jan 2011, 10:55 pm by Maria Roche
TTM (By his Litigation Friend TM) v London Borough of Hackney, East London NHS Foundation Trust; Secretary of State for Health –  Read judgment The Court of Appeal has ruled that the local authority, but not the detaining hospital, was liable to pay compensation to a person who had been unlawfully detained under Section 3 of the Mental Health Act  1983. [read post]
17 Apr 2008, 12:22 pm
Manchester City Council v Moran & Richards v Ipswich Borough Council [2008] EWCA Civ 378 This is a very important Court of Appeal judgment, which will have significant impact on Women’s Refuges and women fleeing domestic violence. [read post]
11 Oct 2008, 10:50 pm
Teixeira v London Borough of Lambeth [2008] EWCA Civ 1088 is a Court of Appeal hearing, referring questions about right of residence under Art 12 of Regulation (EEC) 1612/68 to the European Court. [read post]
20 May 2021, 2:30 am by S S
Hot on the heels of the decision in R (Imam) v London Borough of Croydon (2021) EWHC 739 (Admin) (see our note here) comes this altogether more satisfying decision, Elkundi & Ors, R (On the Application Of) v Birmingham City Council (2021) EWHC 1024 (Admin), on the nature and enforceability of the duty under s. 193(2) Housing Act 1996. [read post]
20 Oct 2011, 1:43 pm by Shaheen Rahman
Updated | Bailey & Others v London Borough of Brent Council [2011] EWHC 2572 (Admin) – Read judgment Every Wednesday my daughter looks forward to the arrival of the mobile library at her nursery. [read post]
28 Jun 2021, 5:00 am
TortTalkers may recall a previous Tort Talk post on the case of Cost v. [read post]
21 Feb 2013, 11:11 pm by NL
The ground 1 claim was on the basis of clause 31 of the post 2009 tenancy agreement, which states:“This is a list of things that you, your lodgers, friends, relatives, visitors and any other person living in the property are not allowed to do whilst in the London Borough of Wandsworth or the area which is local to the property: . breach the tenancy conditions . do anything which causes or is likely to cause a nuisance to anyone living in the borough of Wandsworth… [read post]
21 Feb 2013, 11:11 pm by NL
The ground 1 claim was on the basis of clause 31 of the post 2009 tenancy agreement, which states:“This is a list of things that you, your lodgers, friends, relatives, visitors and any other person living in the property are not allowed to do whilst in the London Borough of Wandsworth or the area which is local to the property: . breach the tenancy conditions . do anything which causes or is likely to cause a nuisance to anyone living in the borough of Wandsworth… [read post]
9 Oct 2019, 7:21 am by Mathew Purchase, Matrix Chambers
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]
29 Jun 2010, 10:36 pm by Rosalind English
 In Baker v Secretary of State for Communities & Local Government [2008] EWCA Civ 141, Dyson LJ, at paragraph 31, Sir John Dyson emphasised that the section 71(1) duty was not a duty to achieve the result of eliminating racial discrimination as such, or to promote equal opportunity, but a duty to have “due regard” to the need to achieve these goals. [read post]
24 Oct 2017, 4:00 am by The Public Employment Law Press
This type of provision, however, has survived in a number of  collective bargaining agreement [see New York State Off. of Mental Health v New York State Div. of Human Rights, 53 A.D.3d 887].* Pursuant to OATH Rule of Practice section 1-49(d), respondent had requested that "Anonymous" be used in reporting this decision. [read post]
24 Oct 2010, 2:10 pm by NL
SO, R (on the application of) v London Borough of Barking and Dagenham [2010] EWCA Civ 1101 I'm a bit slow in getting to this one (and the rest of our backlog). [read post]
24 Oct 2010, 2:10 pm by NL
SO, R (on the application of) v London Borough of Barking and Dagenham [2010] EWCA Civ 1101 I'm a bit slow in getting to this one (and the rest of our backlog). [read post]