Search for: "Lord v. State"
Results 3201 - 3220
of 4,051
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
27 Jan 2011, 4:00 pm
(Eugene Volokh) The case, Yemshaw v. [read post]
26 Jan 2011, 3:24 am
In interviews with housing officers, she complained of her husband’s behaviour, which included shouting in front of the children, and stated that she was scared that if she confronted him he might hit her. [read post]
25 Jan 2011, 11:25 am
State of Haryana, (1993) 3 SCC 114, at page 120, this Court stated the importance of consistent opinions in achieving harmony in Judicial System:"10. [read post]
25 Jan 2011, 9:25 am
The Court considered carefully the comments of the Court of Appeal in R (Factortame Ltd) v Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions (No 8) [2002] EWCA Civ 932, [2003] QB 381. [read post]
25 Jan 2011, 9:25 am
The Court considered carefully the comments of the Court of Appeal in R (Factortame Ltd) v Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions (No 8) [2002] EWCA Civ 932, [2003] QB 381. [read post]
25 Jan 2011, 8:57 am
” As the UKSC Blog notes in their review of The Supreme Court in 2010: Joseph v Spiller [2010] UKSC 53. [read post]
25 Jan 2011, 4:18 am
On Monday and Tuesday 17 to 18 January 2011 Lord Rodger, Lady Hale, and Lords Mance, Collins and Clarke will hear Duncombe and others v Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families. [read post]
23 Jan 2011, 11:00 pm
The Judge, however, stated he was quite satisfied that there was no evidence of a set up. [read post]
21 Jan 2011, 9:30 am
Davies v. [read post]
21 Jan 2011, 1:01 am
As recently as January 2010, Lord Rodger stated in In re Guardian News and Media Limited [2010] 2 WLR 325 that on the existing Strasbourg case law, a right to obtain any information which would not be otherwise available to a person “is not within the scope of Article 10(1)”. [read post]
20 Jan 2011, 10:00 pm
True it is, as Lord Brown says, that th [read post]
19 Jan 2011, 10:55 pm
TTM (By his Litigation Friend TM) v London Borough of Hackney, East London NHS Foundation Trust; Secretary of State for Health – Read judgment The Court of Appeal has ruled that the local authority, but not the detaining hospital, was liable to pay compensation to a person who had been unlawfully detained under Section 3 of the Mental Health Act 1983. [read post]
19 Jan 2011, 3:01 am
In his report concerning 2004 Lord Carlile stated that his views on the use of the power had ‘developed’ (Carlile Report on 2004, para 25) and that ‘their use gave some rise for anxiety’ (para 96). [read post]
19 Jan 2011, 12:10 am
Yesterday’s decision in MGN v United Kingdom (Case No. 39401/04) has become the most discussed media law case of the year so far. [read post]
18 Jan 2011, 10:44 am
They even exist in some U.S. states. [read post]
18 Jan 2011, 7:29 am
In its original application to Strasbourg MGN contested the decision of the House of Lords in Campbell v MGN ([2004] 2 AC 457) that it breached Ms Campbell’s privacy by the publication of an articles in February 2001 in which it divulged details about her drug addiction therapy. [read post]
“Blackmail” costs system violated Daily Mirror’s freedom of expression rights in Naomi Campbell case
18 Jan 2011, 7:20 am
MGN Limited v The United Kingdom - (Application no. 39401/04) Read judgment / press release / our analysis The European Court of Human Rights has ruled that the UK’s controversial no-win-no-fee costs system violated the Daily Mirror’s freedom of expression rights after it was forced to pay model Naomi Campbell’s legal fees after a 2004 House of Lords judgment. [read post]
15 Jan 2011, 4:40 pm
In Lister v Hesley Hall, the House of Lords formulated a wider test, holding that the principal is liable for a tortious act when that is fair and just on the basis of the “close connection” between the act and the employment. [read post]
14 Jan 2011, 9:20 am
There are cases where Singapore do vary including the application of the law of passing off as applied in the House of Lords case of Scandecor. [read post]
13 Jan 2011, 10:00 pm
Bank Mellat v HM Treasury [2011] EWCA Civ 1: read judgment. [read post]
