Search for: "Hale v. United States"
Results 301 - 320
of 424
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
12 Jun 2011, 11:30 pm
The families argued that Re McKerr had been rendered obsolete by the recent Strasbourg decision of Šilih v Slovenia (2009) 49 E.H.R.R. 37. [read post]
2 Jun 2011, 4:04 am
R. and H. v. [read post]
1 Jun 2011, 10:56 pm
As Baroness Hale said at paragraph 73: It is not statute, but the common law, indeed the rule of law itself, which imposes upon the Secretary of State the duty to comply with his own stated policy, unless he has a good reason to depart from it in the particular case at the particular time. [read post]
30 May 2011, 11:37 pm
The decision in McCaughey will not impose a Human Rights Act obligation on the state to investigate pre-commencement deaths, as had been argued in McKerr. [read post]
23 May 2011, 8:44 am
This was the riddle that recently occupied a nine-judge panel of the Supreme Court in R (Adams) v Secretary of State for Justice [2011] UKSC 18. [read post]
20 May 2011, 5:16 am
See Bauman v. [read post]
12 May 2011, 12:30 pm
The Court considered R(M) v Slough BC [2008] UKHL 52 (our report here) as the leading case on s.21(1). [read post]
18 Apr 2011, 5:57 am
Russell v. [read post]
11 Apr 2011, 11:13 am
Knight.Rome : Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 2010. [read post]
27 Mar 2011, 10:46 am
Surely there will be more as long as capital punishment remains part of our penal law.4 And so, in 1972, the United States joined other modern industrial nations in abolishing the death penalty. [read post]
23 Mar 2011, 3:43 am
They stem from the long-established principle of United Kingdom public law that statutory powers must be used for the purpose for which they were conferred and not for some other purpose: Padfield v Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food [1968] AC 997. [read post]
22 Mar 2011, 12:33 pm
Lady Hale also agreed that the Court in Bressol did not accept the A-G’s reasoning. [read post]
17 Mar 2011, 9:15 pm
United States v. [read post]
16 Mar 2011, 3:26 am
Patmalniece (FC) (Appellant) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (Respondent) [2011] UKSC 11 – Read judgment / press summary The Supreme Court has ruled that pensioners from other European Union states should not have the right to claim pension credits in the UK. [read post]
4 Mar 2011, 10:38 am
Martinez (2010); Seth Waxman and Ted Olson in Citizens United v. [read post]
2 Mar 2011, 4:15 am
See Wilson v United States, 221 US 361 (1911). [read post]
1 Mar 2011, 4:49 pm
The case is Ashcroft v. [read post]
11 Feb 2011, 1:16 pm
United States v. [read post]
2 Feb 2011, 5:32 am
ZH (Tanzania) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2011] UKSC 4 (1 February 2011) – Read judgment This case (see yesterday’s summary) is illustrative of two misconceptions about rights that we are all in thrall to from time to time. [read post]
1 Feb 2011, 3:29 am
Updated | ZH (Tanzania) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2011] UKSC 4 (1 February 2011) – Read judgment / press summary / our analysis The Supreme Court has unanimously ruled that in cases where a parent is threatened with deportation, the best interests of their child or children must be taken into account, particularly when the children are citizens by virtue of being born in this country. [read post]
