Search for: "v. "
Results 3061 - 3080
of 493,807
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
29 Feb 2012, 10:37 am
The post Jeffs v. [read post]
22 Jan 2021, 11:45 am
In the November 2020 case of Ochse v. [read post]
22 Feb 2010, 12:30 pm
& C. v. [read post]
5 Jan 2012, 10:19 am
See Wisdom v. [read post]
13 Sep 2023, 10:54 am
Johnson v. [read post]
28 Jul 2011, 8:43 am
"V. [read post]
18 Mar 2009, 8:06 am
The Supreme Court held in Ashe v. [read post]
18 Dec 2023, 9:07 pm
Lundbeck A/S v. [read post]
21 Oct 2013, 8:00 am
In Leos v. [read post]
17 Sep 2023, 9:17 pm
Lee (2017) and Broadband ITV v. [read post]
31 May 2020, 9:00 pm
Sanofi; Janssen Biotech, Inc. v. [read post]
25 Mar 2024, 9:53 pm
Cir. 2023)Malvern Panalytical Inc. v. [read post]
3 Dec 2012, 3:21 am
Econord SpA v Comune di Cagno and others (Joined Cases C-182/11 and C-183/11); [2012] WLR (D) 356 “The condition established by the case law of the Court of Justice European Union (Teckal Srl v Comune di Viano (Case C-107/98) [1999] ECR I-8121 and Parking Brixen GmbH v Gemeinde Brixen (Case C-485/03) [2005] ECR I-8585) to the effect that, in order to be exempted from their obligation to initiate a public tendering procedure and instead to make an in-house award of a… [read post]
13 Oct 2009, 2:08 am
Regina (Friends of the Earth) v Secretary of State for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform; Regina (Help the Aged) v Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Court of Appeal “It was not unlawful for government ministers to consider reasonable practicability, at least to some extent by reference to departmental budgets, when taking steps to [...] [read post]
30 Nov 2011, 3:08 pm
More on Bullock v. [read post]
9 Jul 2010, 11:15 am
OPM and the unconstitutional conditions argument in Mass v. [read post]
16 May 2019, 2:00 am
In Dawson v Steager, 586 U. [read post]
25 Jul 2019, 2:00 am
Kentucky v. [read post]
26 Mar 2024, 5:02 pm
How many chapter 11 filers use subchapter V? [read post]
29 Jan 2010, 1:43 am
Bhamra v Dubb [2010] EWCA Civ 13; [2010] WLR (D) 10 “A caterer, who had supplied a dish for guests at a Sikh wedding knowing that the recipe could sometimes contain egg, a food prohibited by the Sikh religion, owed a duty of care to a guest who was allergic to eggs and subsequently died after eating the dish served. [read post]
