Search for: "Lord v. State"
Results 3461 - 3480
of 4,048
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
28 Jun 2010, 9:54 am
It lists, as Lord Nicholls did in Reynolds v Times Newspapers Ltd (1999), factors to be taken into account by the court when deciding whether a defendant has acted responsibly, but as several cases in the lower courts have shown, judges may be encouraged to view these as tripwires for defendants. [read post]
28 Jun 2010, 6:48 am
In the first reign of the Lord Obama the Hopeful, Grand Master Dan-Nay set out on the path to bring the power and light of the Master Penguin to the far reaches of the Lord's Empire and even beyond to the barbarian and unenlightened hordes populating the universe.I wrote on Penguin Group v. [read post]
28 Jun 2010, 1:13 am
Reputation, as Lord Nicholls explained in Reynolds v Times Newspapers, does matter, and not merely for its service to the individual concerned: ‘Reputation is an integral and important part of the dignity of the individual. [read post]
27 Jun 2010, 10:00 pm
The Secretary of State decided that she was only entitled to a state pension from her 65th birthday. [read post]
26 Jun 2010, 12:07 pm
In Black v. [read post]
25 Jun 2010, 11:32 am
of State. [read post]
25 Jun 2010, 4:55 am
Similarly, in the context of harm to national security, the courts have baulked at the inclusion of prior notification obligations in court orders, prefering to allow editors to assess for themselves the legal risk and to bear the responsibility for error of judgment (see, for example, Attorney General v Times Newspapers [2001] EWCA Civ 97, at [24]-[35], per Lord Phillips MR). [read post]
23 Jun 2010, 2:32 am
Like the UK court in Corbett v. [read post]
23 Jun 2010, 1:30 am
In Flux v. [read post]
22 Jun 2010, 10:26 pm
An example raised by Lord Rodger in Savage was the obligations of state officials towards those with suicidal intent from travelling to Switzerland: of course they cannnot forcibly prevented them from doing this. [read post]
22 Jun 2010, 8:38 pm
Chandler v. [read post]
22 Jun 2010, 1:34 pm
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton put Arizona on noticeceded US land to Mexican drug lords. [read post]
22 Jun 2010, 2:55 am
Lord Justice Waller held (with Ward and Stanley Burton LJJ agreeing ) “It seems to me that the claimant is likely to establish that his Article 8 rights are engaged. [read post]
22 Jun 2010, 1:13 am
We know from cases such as Mosley, McKennit v Ash and Naomi Campell that it covers the publication of information that is obviously private, such as that pertaining to health, medical treatment, sexual life, private finance and family life. [read post]
21 Jun 2010, 2:00 am
The judgment was not unanimous, however, with the Master of the Rolls, Lord Neuberger, dissenting. [read post]
20 Jun 2010, 9:17 pm
United States v. [read post]
18 Jun 2010, 5:25 pm
In White v Sweden ((2008) 46 EHRR 3) the Article 8 “right to protection of reputation” was combined with the positive obligations of the state in the application. [read post]
18 Jun 2010, 4:39 am
The full list of links can be found here. 18 June | FA (Iraq) v Secretary of State for the Home Department: New immigration and asylum judgment from the Administrative Court; new problems for the Government with implementation of a European Directive 17 June | Government shelves Equality Act timetable: From Out-law.com 17 June | Control orders: a balancing act between human rights and national security: Joshua Rozenberg comments on two recent Supreme Court judgments 17 June |… [read post]
18 Jun 2010, 3:47 am
Flintshire argued, drawing on the judgment of Lord Hailsham in London & Clydeside States Ltd v Aberdeen DC [1980] WLR 182, that this was at the lower end of the spectrum of procedural defects so as to enable the court to find that Mrs Tyrrell's review was not a nullity. [read post]
18 Jun 2010, 3:47 am
Flintshire argued, drawing on the judgment of Lord Hailsham in London & Clydeside States Ltd v Aberdeen DC [1980] WLR 182, that this was at the lower end of the spectrum of procedural defects so as to enable the court to find that Mrs Tyrrell's review was not a nullity. [read post]
