Search for: "State v. Wales"
Results 241 - 260
of 1,647
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
31 Mar 2014, 1:43 am
R (Whiston) v Secretary of State for Justice, heard 26 March 2014. [read post]
24 Mar 2014, 3:19 am
Secretary of State for Home Department v MN & KY, heard 5 March 2014. [read post]
10 Nov 2014, 1:36 am
The complaints relate to allegations about Mr Topić’s previous job as Director General of the State Intellectual Property Office of the Republic of Croatia. [read post]
27 Nov 2008, 12:40 pm
As noted by the IPKat earlier, the ECJ today delivered its judgment in Intel v CPM. [read post]
3 Mar 2014, 2:02 am
Agricultural Sector (Wales) Bill – Reference by the Attorney General for England and Wales, heard 17 – 18 February 2014. [read post]
27 Aug 2012, 7:50 am
See, for example, the State of Victoria's website here. [read post]
27 Mar 2023, 8:18 am
On 16 March 2022, the High Court of England and Wales handed down its judgment following the FRAND trial in InterDigital v Lenovo. [read post]
27 Mar 2008, 3:16 pm
Mobil Cerro Negro Ltd. v. [read post]
14 Feb 2018, 3:45 am
In England and Wales, section 9 of the Defamation Act 2013 provides that a court does not have jurisdiction to hear an action against a person not domiciled in the UK, EU or a Lugano Convention state “unless the court is satisfied that, of all the places in which the statement complained of has been published, England and Wales is clearly the most appropriate place in which to bring an action in respect of the statement”. [read post]
17 Mar 2014, 4:34 am
Secretary of State for Home Department v MN & KY, heard 5 March 2014. [read post]
30 Nov 2012, 8:19 am
Court of Appeal (Civil Division) K (Children), Re [2012] EWCA Civ 1549 (29 November 2012) Alfa Laval Tumba AB & Anor v Separator Spares International Ltd & Ors [2012] EWCA Civ 1569 (29 November 2012) Birmingham City Council v Ashton [2012] EWCA Civ 1557 (29 November 2012) Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) Ligaya Nursing v R [2012] EWCA Crim 2521 (30 November 2012) Ravjani & Ors, R. v [2012] EWCA Crim 2519 (29 November 2012) Shabir, R. v… [read post]
19 Nov 2019, 4:18 pm
As Julian Knowles J stated, Part 11 is concerned with issues of personal jurisdiction, such as whether a claim form has been served properly. [read post]
2 Nov 2022, 10:58 am
” The Act states that the signature may be an electronic signature. [read post]
1 Aug 2017, 12:53 am
Background The original claim was brought by the owners and operators of care homes in Wales. [read post]
5 Nov 2011, 5:08 pm
The recent decision in Smallbone v New South Wales Bar Association ([2011] FCA 1145) illustrates the broader application of data protection law to privacy issues arising in between private parties and provides judicial guidance in relation to the exception that applies when access to information has been requested by an individual but their interest has to be balanced with the need to protect the privacy of other individuals. [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]
15 Aug 2007, 2:50 am
Just three days ago, I noted United States v. [read post]
3 Sep 2020, 4:28 am
In Reklos v Greece ([2009] ECHR 200). the Court stated that while the right to control the use of one’s image generally involves the possibility of refusing publication, “it also covers the individual’s right to object to the recording, conservation and reproduction” of that image. [read post]
13 Feb 2009, 10:09 am
Although it is a Scottish case, it plainly has implications for England and Wales, not just because of the pending appeal in X v Hounslow. [read post]
7 Dec 2015, 4:23 pm
As the editors of Gatley correctly stated at para 24.29, the effect of section 9 is to oblige the court to consider all the jurisdictions where the defamatory statement had been published, in order to determine whether the domestic jurisdiction was clearly the most appropriate place in which to bring the action. [read post]
