Search for: "State v. Lord"
Results 281 - 300
of 3,588
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
5 Oct 2011, 5:37 pm
And does it necessarily imply a draconian framework of state interference? [read post]
2 Jul 2021, 1:51 am
The appellants’ first alternative, which involves leaving the law as stated in OBG but without a dealing requirement, would dispense with the control mechanism which the House of Lords considered to be both necessary and desirable. [read post]
1 Dec 2010, 4:35 pm
Lord Phillips also re-named the defence as “honest comment” (as opposed to Court of Appeal in BCA v Singh [2010] EWCA Civ 350, which favoured “honest opinion” [35]) and called on the Law Commission to consider and review the present state of the defence. [read post]
5 Apr 2012, 1:47 am
Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Stangroom & Anor v Brown [2012] EWCA Civ 424 (04 April 2012) Foley Independent News & Media Ltd & Ors v Lord Ashcroft KCMG [2012] EWCA Civ 423 (04 April 2012) Salimi, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department & Anor [2012] EWCA Civ 422 (04 April 2012) High Court (Queen’s Bench Division) Jeeg Global Ltd v Hare [2012] EWHC 871 (QB) (04 April 2012) Burn… [read post]
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]
13 Apr 2018, 8:52 am
The Supreme Court On 24 January 2018, Lord Mance, Lord Sumption, Lord Hodge, Lord Lloyd-Jones and Lord Briggs heard the appeal in the Supreme Court. [read post]
25 Jun 2010, 11:32 am
of State. [read post]
2 Mar 2011, 7:56 am
[thanks to quick study memo from Lock Lorde] Fleischer Studios, Inc. v. [read post]
1 Nov 2019, 9:16 am
Since the release of the UK Supreme Court's decision in Unilever v Shanks [2019] UKSC 45 (IPKat post here) the mainstream and social media have been awash with hyperbole as to the potential impact of the decision on large employers. [read post]
18 Mar 2015, 3:38 am
Lord Reed, giving the leading judgment, stated that the question was whether the established indirect discrimination was a proportionate means of meeting legitimate aims. [read post]
21 Aug 2012, 4:00 am
In Lord-N-Fields Voice of Freedom Bible Church Community Workers Intl., Inc. v Kwan, (Sup. [read post]
19 Jan 2014, 9:00 pm
Lord Hoffmann found “no value” in the Committee’s position (para. 57). [read post]
24 Feb 2016, 2:22 am
The trial judge held that he was bound to follow the approach adopted by the House of Lords in the cases of Cookson v Knowles [1979] AC 556 and Graham v Dodds [1983] 1 WLR 808 and to calculate the multiplier from the date of death. [read post]
31 Oct 2016, 8:35 am
Lord Kerr noted in particular the procedural arrangements as set out in the Act and the suggestion that service may be postal. [read post]
13 Oct 2011, 4:09 am
Supreme Court Quila & Anor, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2011] UKSC 45 (12 October 2011) AXA General Insurance Ltd & Ors v Lord Advocate & Ors (Scotland) [2011] UKSC 46 (12 October 2011) Ambrose v Harris, Procurator Fiscal, Oban (Scotland) [2011] UKSC 43 (6 October 2011) Her Majesty’s Advocate v P (Scotland) [2011] UKSC 44 (6 October 2011) Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Jones… [read post]
9 Aug 2017, 3:09 am
In the context of these applications, the fact of and reasons for his arrest were stated in open court. [read post]
8 Dec 2016, 1:30 am
Eadie QC: yes. 15.20 Eadie QC submits that Parliament set up a legislative scheme under the 1972 Act by way that actions by the UK Government and those of other member states flow back to affect member states. [read post]
13 Feb 2009, 10:09 am
Also (and thanks to Rosaleen Kilbane of CLP for the information), the decision in Secretary of State for the Environment Food & Rural Affairs v Meier & Ors [2008] EWCA Civ 903 is also off to the Lords. [read post]
24 Jul 2010, 10:04 am
The defence of fair comment was last considered by the House of Lords in Telnikoff v Matusevitch ([1992] 2 AC 343). [read post]
10 Dec 2014, 2:32 am
On appeal from: [2013] EWCA Civ 1587; [2013] EWHC 3777 (Admin) The Supreme Court had to consider if it should depart from the previous House of Lords judgment in R (James & Ors) v Secretary of State for Justice following the ECtHR ruling in James v UK when considering the joined appeals relating to prisoners sentenced to imprisonment for public protection or life imprisonment. [read post]
