Search for: "v. "
Results 2741 - 2760
of 493,764
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
26 Aug 2014, 1:23 pm
Last week I noted the appeal in Jones v. [read post]
24 Sep 2008, 11:53 am
Gunvalson v. [read post]
3 Oct 2019, 4:15 am
HP, and Hikma v. [read post]
23 Mar 2010, 5:00 am
Here are more materials from Weinstat v. [read post]
10 Sep 2010, 5:25 pm
I posted a copy of the Complaint (aka Statement of Claim) in Wawrzyniak v. [read post]
12 May 2015, 8:53 am
Wong and United States v. [read post]
23 Feb 2019, 3:07 pm
Timbs v. [read post]
21 Mar 2012, 9:22 am
G v de Visser (Case C-292/10); [2012] WLR (D) 87 “Where it was impossible to locate the whereabouts of a defendant, European Union law did not preclude the issue of judgment by default in circumstances where the document instituting proceedings had been served by public notice under national law, provided that the court seised of the matter had first satisfied itself that all investigations required by the principles of diligence and good faith had been undertaken to trace the… [read post]
9 May 2012, 1:54 am
Migrationsverket v Kastrati and Others (Case C-620/10); [2012] WLR (D) 139 “The withdrawal of an asylum application which occurred before the requested member state had agreed to take charge of the asylum seeker, had the effect that Council Regulation (EC) No 343/2003 which established the criteria and mechanisms for determining the member state responsible for examining an asylum application would no longer be applicable. [read post]
27 Jun 2011, 6:43 am
Regina v McKenzie [2011] EWCA Crim 1550; [2011] WLR (D) 207 “Where the counts in an indictment referred to offences contrary to a specific statutory provision but the particulars referred to acts which would be contrary to a different statutory provision, findings of a jury could not be upheld on the basis that the requirements of section 4A(2)(b) of the Criminal Procedure (Insanity) Act 1964 were met, or that the defects could be cured by application of section 3 of the Criminal… [read post]
25 Jan 2012, 2:04 am
Regina v C(S) [2012] EWCA Crim 6; [2012] WLR (D) 5 “At a retrial of a conspirator about whom the jury at the first trial had been unable to reach a verdict, the Crown would be entitled to tell the jury that it was the prosecution’s case that those who had been acquitted at the first trial were probably involved in the conspiracy and that the jury would be entitled to take into account the acquitted conspirators’ probable role in the importation when deciding whether they… [read post]
28 May 2010, 2:18 am
Jones v Kernott [2010] EWCA Civ 578; [2010] WLR (D) 136 “Where the parties had agreed when they separated that they had equal interests in a residential property conveyed into their joint names there had to be something to displace those interests before the court could impute from the parties’ conduct an intention to vary that equality. [read post]
15 Nov 2010, 2:14 am
Watkins v Woolas [2010] EWHC 2702 (QB); [2010] WLR (D) 288 “S 106 of the Representation of the People Act 1983, which imposed the penalties for an election candidate found guilty of a corrupt or illegal practice, was compatible with the right to freedom of expression contained in art 10 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. [read post]
3 Apr 2012, 2:25 am
Regina v Newell [2012] EWCA Crim 650; [2012] WLR (D) 105 “A statement made on a plea and case management hearing form by the defendant’s counsel, although admissible in principle as a matter of law, should not, in the exercise of the court’s discretion under section 78 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (‘PACE’), be admitted in evidence against the defendant at trial, provided that the case had been conducted in accordance with the letter and the… [read post]
26 Apr 2010, 3:18 am
R v Modjiri [2010] EWCA Crim 829; [2010] WLR (D) 99 “The concern of s 79(3) of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 is limited to the valuation of property and does not extend to the realisation of property, so that it does not have to be assumed that a beneficial interest in property has to be sold separately from the property and, for the purposes of making a confiscation order, the correct basis on which to proceed is to take into account the due proportion of the proceeds which the… [read post]
15 Dec 2010, 6:36 pm
MDY Industries, LLC v. [read post]
9 Sep 2010, 12:56 pm
FTC v. [read post]
2 Jul 2013, 6:37 am
Here: Tonasket v Sargent Cert Opp The petition is here. [read post]
10 Mar 2017, 1:05 pm
Here is the Oral Argument in Pena-Rodriguez v. [read post]
8 Jun 2021, 6:17 am
Here: Phillips v OIN Cert Petition Lower court materials here. [read post]
