Search for: "Hart v. State"
Results 321 - 340
of 1,152
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
23 Feb 2018, 8:52 pm
The book, Responsible Enterprise (Munich: CH Beck, Oxford, Hart, 2018), is authored by Birgit Spiesshofer, who has worked as a lawyer who since 2002 has served, inter alia, as Chair of the CSR committees of the International Bar Association, the Council of Bars and Law Societies of Europe, and the German Lawyers Association. [read post]
12 Feb 2018, 5:00 am
He stated in an interview with the CBC, “fundamentally, it’s about business models that will solve these issues”. [read post]
6 Feb 2018, 7:37 am
Justice Scalia provides us with an explanation (Kansas v. [read post]
5 Feb 2018, 10:27 am
Rickless, Maimon Schwarzschild, William Voegeli, Larry Alexander, 54 San Diego Law Review 197-341 (2017).Gerard V. [read post]
11 Jan 2018, 8:00 am
LaGrand (Germany v United States of America) (2001)Cameron Miles22. [read post]
8 Jan 2018, 11:35 pm
Eirik Bjorge (Univ. of Bristol - Law) & Cameron Miles (3 Verulam Buildings) have published Landmark Cases in Public International Law (Hart Publishing 2017). [read post]
13 Dec 2017, 9:36 am
Co. v. [read post]
13 Dec 2017, 9:36 am
Co. v. [read post]
5 Dec 2017, 11:40 am
B [2010] EWHC 1626 (Comm), paras [25-31] (court rejected challenge based upon tribunal’s failure to apply Spanish law); Ruby Roz Agricol LLP v The Republic of Kazakhstan [2017] EWHC 439 (court declined to apply expansive interpretation of Kazakh law).5See English Arbitration Act 1996, Section 69; Enterprise Insurance Company Plc v U-Drive Solutions (Gibraltar) Limited [2016] EWHC 1301 (QB) (court lacked jurisdiction over appeal because Section 69 conditions were not met,… [read post]
5 Dec 2017, 11:40 am
B [2010] EWHC 1626 (Comm), paras [25-31] (court rejected challenge based upon tribunal’s failure to apply Spanish law); Ruby Roz Agricol LLP v The Republic of Kazakhstan [2017] EWHC 439 (court declined to apply expansive interpretation of Kazakh law).5See English Arbitration Act 1996, Section 69; Enterprise Insurance Company Plc v U-Drive Solutions (Gibraltar) Limited [2016] EWHC 1301 (QB) (court lacked jurisdiction over appeal because Section 69 conditions were not met,… [read post]
3 Dec 2017, 4:04 pm
Tzanou, The Fundamental Right to Data Protection: Normative Value in the Context of Counter-Terrorism Surveillance (Oxford, Hart Publishing 2017), Maria Tzanou, Keele University. [read post]
22 Nov 2017, 8:09 am
English v. [read post]
22 Nov 2017, 8:09 am
English v. [read post]
20 Nov 2017, 9:57 am
However, as in civil procedure applicable in the United States, parties may move to compel disclosure if the opposing party refuses or fails to produce documents. [read post]
20 Nov 2017, 7:16 am
’ Since the Town Board left itself this latitude to identify additional areas in the future, the petitioner did not ‘establish a clear conflict with the comprehensive plan’ (Matter of Hart v Town Bd. of Town of Huntington, 114 AD3d at 683, quoting Infinity Consulting Group, Inc. v Town of Huntington, 49 AD3d at 814). [read post]
20 Nov 2017, 7:16 am
’ Since the Town Board left itself this latitude to identify additional areas in the future, the petitioner did not ‘establish a clear conflict with the comprehensive plan’ (Matter of Hart v Town Bd. of Town of Huntington, 114 AD3d at 683, quoting Infinity Consulting Group, Inc. v Town of Huntington, 49 AD3d at 814). [read post]
15 Nov 2017, 10:12 am
For example, the New York Court of Appeals rejected a literal application of the “total pollution exclusion” in Belt Painting v. [read post]
15 Nov 2017, 10:12 am
For example, the New York Court of Appeals rejected a literal application of the “total pollution exclusion” in Belt Painting v. [read post]
13 Nov 2017, 9:12 am
For example, the New York Insurance Law specifically provides that evidence relating to other “similarly situated” policyholders is relevant to the issue of the materiality of an alleged misrepresentation in the policy application.5 As exemplified by the New York Court of Appeals in Belt Painting v. [read post]
13 Nov 2017, 9:12 am
For example, the New York Insurance Law specifically provides that evidence relating to other “similarly situated” policyholders is relevant to the issue of the materiality of an alleged misrepresentation in the policy application.5 As exemplified by the New York Court of Appeals in Belt Painting v. [read post]
