Search for: "State v. Lord" Results 2961 - 2980 of 3,609
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
24 Mar 2024, 5:19 am by Frank Cranmer
You can read the Lord Chancellor’s speech here. [read post]
28 Jul 2024, 11:25 am by Giles Peaker
Accordingly, I agree with my Lord that the terms of paragraph (j) of clause 5(4) do not extend to cover legal costs in the service charge. [read post]
7 Feb 2016, 4:04 pm by INFORRM
As already mentioned, on the same day Lord Thomas CJ and Nicola Davies J gave judgment on remedy in the case of HM Attorney-General v Conde Nast Publications Ltd. [read post]
14 Mar 2013, 4:00 am by Administrator
In Improver, Hoffman J. stated that the second Catnic question (the third Improver question) the question that raised the question of construction (as compared to the factual background against which the claim is to be construed) [read post]
22 Jan 2023, 4:35 pm by INFORRM
United States The Supreme Court is also expected to hear two cases – Moody v NetChoice and NetChoice v Paxton – concerning the constitutionality of laws in Florida and Texas, which restrict the content moderation capabilities of social media companies. [read post]
29 Jun 2014, 5:23 pm by INFORRM
  Meanwhile, the Press Gazette reported a bizarre attack on the Royal Charter by Lord Lester who apparently regarded it as outrageous because some people that he talks to have confused it with the Star Chamber. [read post]
22 Feb 2019, 4:02 pm by INFORRM
Charity Commission, in which Lord Mance stated that, “Article 10 would itself become a European-wide Freedom of Information law. [read post]
2 Sep 2016, 4:00 am by Legal Beagle
  In Bartos v Scottish Legal Complaints Commission 2015 SC 690, at its own instance the court raised a question as to the proper approach to certain provisions in the Legal Profession and Legal Aid (Scotland) Act 2007 (the Act). [read post]
4 Dec 2022, 3:30 am by Frank Cranmer
Lord Bellamy, Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State at the Ministry of Justice, told the House that the Government hopes to publish its initial response to the Law Commission’s final recommendations on reforming weddings law in England and Wales in the first part of next year. [read post]
6 May 2014, 4:04 am by SHG
Praise and glory be yours, O Lord, now and forever more. [read post]
22 Oct 2010, 3:15 am by GuestPost
  Coupled with this, the Home Office Interim Guidance stated that while stereotyping was not permitted a person’s faith or ethnicity might, in combination with other factors, be relevant (p. 12). [read post]
8 Jun 2010, 5:19 pm by INFORRM
    As Lord Lester appears to recognise, this is not a reform proposal which should be taken forward. [read post]
15 Aug 2023, 12:50 am by David Pocklington
The full document is available here and our summary is here, and reflects the leading judgment of Lord Bingham (at 21) and the comments of Lord Hope (at 49) in Regina (Munjaz) v Mersey Care NHS Trust [2006] 2 AC 148. [read post]
7 Jan 2012, 4:16 pm by Charon QC
” Rather than face the inevitable sack, Judge Woodcock-Bolton resigned on medical grounds…”The Lord Chancellor and the Lord Chief Justice have decided no further disciplinary action is required. [read post]
8 Mar 2011, 8:11 am by Marko Milanovic
To that extent, as I discuss here, the UK Supreme Court's recent decision in Smith v Secretary of State for Defence, in which it held that UK soldiers do not have rights against the UK under the ECHR when operating outside an area under UK effective control, was in accordance with the principle of universality. [read post]
10 May 2020, 4:28 pm by INFORRM
Breach- sanction: action as offered by publication 09597-19 Bremner v The Scotsman, 1 Accuracy (2019), Breach- sanction: action as offered by publication09539-19 A Woman v Hull Daily Mail, 2 Privacy (2019), 6 Children (2019), 9 Reporting of crime (2019), Breach- sanction: publication of adjudication 09155-19 Brown v thesundaytimes.co.uk,  1 Accuracy (2019), No breach- after investigation 07966-19 Water UK v The Times,1 Accuracy (2019), Breach- sanction:… [read post]
15 Apr 2016, 4:50 am by Graham Smith
(Lord Bingham, A-G’s Ref (No 5 of 2002), 2004) "this impenetrable statute … one of the most complex and unsatisfactory statutes currently in force. [read post]