Search for: "London, Appeal of"
Results 3361 - 3380
of 5,582
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
4 Apr 2012, 9:30 am
It is an argument that superficially appeals to many but is in error. [read post]
4 Apr 2012, 6:37 am
The judgment of the Court of Appeal is accordingly Affirmed. [read post]
4 Apr 2012, 4:20 am
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, Copyright infringement. [read post]
4 Apr 2012, 2:57 am
I think this ruling shows that the justices that make up NY’s appeals court are smart. [read post]
3 Apr 2012, 6:34 am
A few tidbits: On May 12, 2010, Richardson entered his appearance as Reyes’s attorney before the Board of Immigration Appeals, stating that he was admitted to practice in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and the Cherokee Nation, and filed an appeal of the immigration judge’s order that had removed Reyes to Mexico. [read post]
3 Apr 2012, 4:57 am
The husband's application was refused by the Court of Appeal. [read post]
3 Apr 2012, 4:38 am
* "Standards and patents in ICT: a conference in June", in which the IPKat announces a conference coming up in London on 12 June on, well you can guess [read post]
2 Apr 2012, 12:31 am
”, London School of Economics. [read post]
1 Apr 2012, 11:00 pm
Sign up to free human rights updates by email, Facebook, Twitter or RSS Related posts Analysis: occupy London loses final eviction court challenge Metropolitan Police succeed in G20 “kettling” appeal Occupy London to be evicted – full judgment Climate Camp protesters did not threaten breach of the peace, says High Court Filed under: Art. 10 | Freedom of Expression, Art. 11 | Freedom of Association, Art. 5 | Right to Liberty, Case… [read post]
1 Apr 2012, 4:36 pm
Harripaul v London Borough of Lewisham [2012] EWCA Civ 266 was an appeal to the Court of Appeal from a failed S.204 appeal to the County Court on a homeless matter.The appeal was given permission, and Rimer LJexpressed the view that the appellant had a real prospect of showing that the reviewing officer’s decision was materially deficient and that the judge’s upholding of it reflected unjustified benevolence. [read post]
1 Apr 2012, 4:36 pm
Harripaul v London Borough of Lewisham [2012] EWCA Civ 266 was an appeal to the Court of Appeal from a failed S.204 appeal to the County Court on a homeless matter.The appeal was given permission, and Rimer LJexpressed the view that the appellant had a real prospect of showing that the reviewing officer’s decision was materially deficient and that the judge’s upholding of it reflected unjustified benevolence. [read post]
30 Mar 2012, 10:49 am
Mrs Reynolds obtained further legal advice that an appeal had no realistic prospect of success. [read post]
30 Mar 2012, 8:23 am
London-based Reprieve is singled out for the harshest criticism. [read post]
29 Mar 2012, 7:42 am
The IPKat expects that there will be an appeal, and looks forward to round 2. [read post]
28 Mar 2012, 8:30 am
The drug was shipped from a London wholesaler, Dream Pharma Ltd., which purchased it from a third firm, the Britian-based Archimedes Pharma Ltd., the filings state. [read post]
27 Mar 2012, 8:26 am
In Abellio London Ltd (Formerly Travel London Ltd) v Musse and others UKEAT 0283/11 and 0631/11, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (“EAT”) ruled that a relocation of six miles within central London which resulted in the employees having to travel an extra one to two hours to work following a service provision change amounted to a substantial change to employees’ working conditions to their material detriment entitling them to resign under regulation 4(9) of the… [read post]
27 Mar 2012, 8:26 am
In Abellio London Ltd (Formerly Travel London Ltd) v Musse and others UKEAT 0283/11 and 0631/11, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (“EAT”) ruled that a relocation of six miles within central London which resulted in the employees having to travel an extra one to two hours to work following a service provision change amounted to a substantial change to employees’ working conditions to their material detriment entitling them to resign under regulation… [read post]
26 Mar 2012, 6:52 am
”, London School of Economics. [read post]
22 Mar 2012, 5:00 am
In this case, the priority scheme is of limited effect as Nortel does not own the property in question, save for the Retained Lands at the London site. [read post]
22 Mar 2012, 1:52 am
The Court of Appeals would then be the referral court for the Court of First Instance. [read post]
