Search for: "State v. Bingham"
Results 281 - 300
of 392
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
17 Jul 2010, 2:11 am
Reynolds and Jameel – the existing law Before examining the proposals in Lord Lester’s Defamation Bill it is perhaps worth summarising shortly the existing state of the Reynolds common law defence. [read post]
16 Jul 2010, 3:52 am
See also the observation of Bingham LJ (as he then was) in Slipper v BBC that ‘Defamatory statements are objectionable not least because of their propensity to percolate through underground channels and contaminate hidden springs’ (1991] 1 QB 283, 300.) [read post]
16 Jul 2010, 2:00 am
The legal test of bias is whether the fair-minded and informed observer, having considered the facts, would conclude that there was a real possibility that the tribunal was biased (Lawal v Northern Spirit [14], R v Abdroikov, 14-17 Bingham). [read post]
14 Jul 2010, 11:00 pm
The two types of investigation are distinct; notably Lord Bingham’s comments in Amin referred only to investigations in which the enhanced obligation was triggered. [read post]
12 Jul 2010, 1:10 am
It noted that the problem of deciding the Court’s temporal jurisdiction had been considered with varying results in previous cases, notably Blecic v Croatia (2006) 43 E.H.R.R. 48, Moldovan v Romania (2007) 44 E.H.R.R. 16, Balasoiu v Romania (App. no. 37424/97), 2 September 2003, and Kholodova v Russia (App. no. 30651/05), 14 September 2006. [read post]
6 Jul 2010, 11:29 pm
“ He says of the decision in JR17: And yet in its decision of 23 June 2010 in the Northern Ireland appeal JR 17 [2010] UKSC 27, the UK Supreme Court refers to and relies upon Lord Bingham’s approach in Ali v. [read post]
5 Jul 2010, 10:08 pm
Right to liberty: Entick v Carrington (1765) Prohibition on retrospective liability: Philips v Eyre (1870) 6 QB 1 (see our recent post on this principle) Prohibition of torture has long been a “constitutional principle”, according to Lord Bingham in A & Others v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2006] 2 AC 221 The right to fair trail, defined in the Magna Carter as “due process of the law” (Chapter 29 of the 1354… [read post]
2 Jul 2010, 5:00 pm
Smith v. [read post]
2 Jul 2010, 4:21 pm
On Monday, June 28, 2010, in McDonald v. [read post]
28 Jun 2010, 9:59 pm
Sir John Dyson explained the substance of this right at paragraph 59 by quoting from Lord Bingham in A v Head Teacher and Governors of Lord Grey School [2006] UKHL 14, paragraph 24: [The right to education] was intended to guarantee fair and non-discriminatory access to that system by those within the jurisdiction of the respective states … But the guarantee is, in comparison with most other Convention guarantees, a weak one, and deliberately so. [read post]
15 Jun 2010, 11:06 pm
As Lord Bingham put it in R (Amin) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2004] 1 AC, HL [31] The purposes of such an investigation are clear: to ensure so far as possible that the full facts are brought to light; that culpable and discreditable conduct is exposed and brought to public notice; that suspicion of deliberate wrongdoing (if unjustified) is allayed; that dangerous practices and procedures are rectified; and that those who have lost their relative may at… [read post]
27 May 2010, 12:57 am
He approved Lord Bingham’s comments in R v Cambridge Health Authority ex parte B [1995] 1 WLR 898, when he stated: I have no doubt that in a perfect world any treatment which a patient… sought would be provided if doctors were willing to give it, no matter how much it costs… It would however, in my view, be shutting one’s eyes to the real world… It is common knowledge that health authorities of all kinds are constantly pressed to make ends… [read post]
13 May 2010, 3:26 am
The intent and purpose of the 1999 Order was set out effectively in R v Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions and Another, Ex Parte Spath Holme Limited which was referred to in the instant case. [read post]
13 May 2010, 3:26 am
The intent and purpose of the 1999 Order was set out effectively in R v Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions and Another, Ex Parte Spath Holme Limited which was referred to in the instant case. [read post]
28 Apr 2010, 3:04 am
Lord Bingham of Cornhill determined that customary international law recognized the crime of aggression as evidenced by treaty practice since the 1920s, the Nuremberg and Tokyo proceedings, and the ICC negotiations. [read post]
20 Apr 2010, 5:56 pm
May 11, 12-1: I'll be speaking at the San Jose State library school about regulating reputation systems. [read post]
31 Mar 2010, 9:41 pm
McDonald v. [read post]
29 Mar 2010, 11:37 am
However, it is established that article 6(1) of the Convention applies only to civil rights which can be said on arguable grounds to be recognised under domestic law” (Matthews, per Lord Bingham, at [3]). [read post]
24 Mar 2010, 9:24 pm
This, Amar explains, is why Bingham added the words “no state shall” to the second draft of Section One. [read post]
11 Mar 2010, 4:10 pm
After reviewing the precedent cases (Johnson v Gore Wood & Co (a firm) [2002] 2 AC 1, Stuart v Goldberg Linde (a firm) [2008] 1 WLR 823 ) and noting that it would be "wrong to hold that because a matter could have been raised in earlier proceedings it should have been, so as to render the raising of it in later proceedings necessarily abusive" (Lord Bingham in Johnson), and the Art 6 entitlement to access to justice for an arguable case, the Court of Appeal… [read post]
