Search for: "US v. London"
Results 241 - 260
of 4,306
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
31 Jul 2013, 6:58 pm
City of New London, which says that a taking is for a constitutional “public use,” so long as it might advance some “public purpose” that isn’t “pretextual. [read post]
17 Oct 2008, 1:30 pm
Simms v London Borough of Islington [2008] EWCA Civ 1083 is Court of Appeal case from a s.204 appeal. [read post]
21 Nov 2012, 6:34 am
I suppose that such a thought forgets the ingenuity of litigants and, in particular, their lawyers.The particular matter that was argued here was whether a 'wife' could proceed with an application under Part III of the Matrimonial and Family Proceedings Act 1984, despite the fact that the marriage ceremony, conducted at an hotel in London, "could never have achieved the status even of a void marriage in English law".Let us start with the basics. [read post]
28 Jun 2010, 11:39 am
In a landmark decision, the United States Supreme Court ruled last week in the case of Morrision et al. v. [read post]
17 Jun 2016, 11:44 am
Nevertheless in Bayerische Motoren Werke AG v Technosport London Ltd and Anor [2016] EWHC 797 (IPEC) (13 April 2016) that is exactly what happened, and the defendant won on one count of trade mark infringement. [read post]
29 Oct 2023, 11:58 am
In general terms the use describes what use is being made of the living accommodation, and the purpose is the reason why that use is being made of the living accommodation. [read post]
8 Apr 2008, 9:47 am
City of New London, affirmed.The decision can be found here. [read post]
9 Dec 2009, 3:24 pm
The Kelo v. [read post]
19 Mar 2013, 1:30 pm
"The Europeanisation of Asylum Policies: Lessons Drawn from the Reception Conditions Directive," London Migration Research Group Seminar, London, 12 March 2013 [access]Eweida, Religion, Sexuality, Politics, Kylie and Asylum (Free Movement Blog, March 2013) [text] - "[Eweida v UK] is a useful reminder that decision makers should not rush to judgment on another person’s inner identity." [read post]
7 Jul 2011, 8:53 am
The parents married in London on 27th July 2004. [read post]
20 Jul 2014, 9:29 pm
It’s interesting to contrast the UK Red Bus decision with the recent controversial US 2nd Circuit decision in Cariou v. [read post]
15 Apr 2012, 2:08 pm
Macattram v Camden London Borough Council (2012) QBD (Admin) On Lawtel but no on BAILII This is an interesting little problem involving the payment of Council Tax. [read post]
15 Apr 2012, 2:08 pm
Macattram v Camden London Borough Council (2012) QBD (Admin) On Lawtel but no on BAILII This is an interesting little problem involving the payment of Council Tax. [read post]
27 Aug 2010, 9:54 pm
C5 (UK) will be holding its 19th Forum on Biotech Patenting on October 6-7, 2010 in London, England. [read post]
3 May 2012, 2:28 pm
Transport for London (TfL) v Griffin & Ors [2012] EWHC 1105 (QB) - Read Judgment Transport for London (TfL) have succeeded in their High Court application for an injunction restraining Addison Lee Taxis from encouraging drivers to use London bus lanes. [read post]
16 Feb 2019, 9:51 am
" In CRDA v. [read post]
28 Jun 2010, 8:52 am
City of New London [videorecording] : 545 U.S. 469 (2005) / produced by Thomas Metzloff, Sarah Wood, Todd ShoemakerLucas v. [read post]
17 Dec 2010, 7:13 pm
” When Kelo v. [read post]
8 Jun 2012, 1:11 pm
Chisea v. 24x7digital thus becomes a case to watch for its potential to provide such guidance. [read post]
26 Jul 2018, 12:11 am
Although Nike establishedthat LNDR could be understood to mean "Londoner" in the right context, it did "not begin to establish... that LNDR would have been perceived by the average consumer as meaning Londoner when used in respect of clothing ... in the absence of some context suggesting that meaning. [read post]
