Search for: "State v. Lord"
Results 301 - 320
of 3,588
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
26 Sep 2008, 12:38 am
Beast Six Six Six Lord v. [read post]
27 Apr 2016, 2:15 am
On the issue of R (Francis) Lord Wilson stated that it was wrongly decided. [read post]
20 Nov 2006, 5:12 am
Davies, (Not Yet) Taking Rights Seriously: The House of Lords in Begum v. [read post]
23 May 2011, 8:14 am
As a party litigant without representation, Mr Wilson was, according to court observers, forced abroad to Japan and the United States for supportive expert medical reports. [read post]
13 Jan 2012, 1:00 am
This was clearly indicated in the second paragraph, which stated that “In resolving the point of law it will be appropriate to have regard to policy” and in Lord Brown’s statement that “The general public would be appalled if in those circumstances the law attached liability for the death only [read post]
18 Aug 2020, 5:13 am
The unanimous judgment was given by Lord Kerr (former Lord Chief Justice of Northern Ireland), with whom Lady Black, Lord Lloyd-Jones, Lord Kitchin and Lord Burnett agreed. [read post]
20 Apr 2018, 1:56 am
In R v May, R v Jennings, R v Green the House of Lords directed courts to consider the three questions which arise in making a confiscation order separately, even if the result was a low order. [read post]
6 Jan 2021, 8:04 am
That decision was challenged by BAI, one of P&O’s competitors, and the GC annulled the Commission’s decision on the grounds that it had misinterpreted the State Aid rules (Case T-14/96 Bretagne Angleterre Irelande (BAI) v European Commission). [read post]
15 Feb 2008, 7:40 pm
As Judge Sack notes in his dissenting opinion in United States v. [read post]
3 Mar 2010, 2:22 am
As previously reported here, the House of Lords' decision in Johnston v NEI International Combustion [2007] UKHL 39 found that asymptomatic pleural plaque claims were not compensatable under the current laws. [read post]
3 Mar 2010, 2:22 am
As previously reported here, the House of Lords' decision in Johnston v NEI International Combustion [2007] UKHL 39 found that asymptomatic pleural plaque claims were not compensatable under the current laws. [read post]
28 May 2012, 11:38 am
In answering the issues, the Court of Appeal relied upon the (minority) judgment of Lord Hoffman in Cambridge Gas Transportation Corporation v Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors of Navigator Holdings [2006] UKPC 26, and Re HIH Casualty and General Insurance Ltd [2008] UKHL 21, finding that foreign court proceedings could in fact be recognised in this case under the Model Law. [read post]
22 Mar 2021, 4:07 pm
B. 1703), and this principle “laid down . . . by Lord Holt” was followed “in many subsequent cases,” Embrey v. [read post]
3 Jul 2011, 4:12 am
R (Quila & Anor) v Secretary of State for the Home Department and R (Bibi & Anor) v Secretary of State for the Home Department, heard 8 – 9 June 2011. [read post]
20 Mar 2020, 6:33 am
Martin v. [read post]
5 Dec 2011, 3:30 am
Hampton v. [read post]
25 Mar 2015, 3:17 am
Giving the leading judgment Lord Carnwath reasoned that reference had to be made to the government’s practice as well as the text of the nationality law of the state in question. [read post]
22 Feb 2018, 8:55 am
The IPKat expects that the very vocal panel of judges in the form of Lord Mance, Lord Sumption, Lord Reed, Lord Hodge and Lord Briggs will be grappling with these issues and much more in preparing their judgment. [read post]
15 Jun 2012, 3:35 am
Concluding on the basis of previous authorities that ‘attributability’ had been interpreted as requiring a ‘real possibility of a causal link’ (para 35), Lord Walker expressed the view that it was therefore a legal impossibility for a claimant to lack knowledge of attributability once the claim had been issued, given that the claim form contained a statement of truth which stated as much (see also per Lord Wilson at para 3). [read post]
15 Jun 2012, 3:35 am
Concluding on the basis of previous authorities that ‘attributability’ had been interpreted as requiring a ‘real possibility of a causal link’ (para 35), Lord Walker expressed the view that it was therefore a legal impossibility for a claimant to lack knowledge of attributability once the claim had been issued, given that the claim form contained a statement of truth which stated as much (see also per Lord Wilson at para 3). [read post]
