Search for: "Hales v State"
Results 341 - 360
of 1,080
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
17 Jul 2017, 6:46 am
The Supreme Court of Canada has issued its decision in Google Inc v Equustek (28 June 2017). [read post]
14 Jul 2017, 2:40 am
Baroness Hale agreed with this. [read post]
13 Jul 2017, 10:00 am
The FtT stated that the burden of proof in immigration appeals is on the appellant and the standard of proof is the balance of probabilities. [read post]
13 Jul 2017, 9:03 am
The Divisional Court had little difficulty in answering the case stated in the negative. [read post]
12 Jul 2017, 4:15 pm
Moreover, the US Department of State Human Rights Report for Uganda cites examples to unlawful killings and torture, and other abuses of detainees and suspects. [read post]
10 Jul 2017, 7:00 am
In these cases, which certainly include D and V, a proper criminal investigation by the state is required. [read post]
10 Jul 2017, 2:46 am
As demonstrated by Mamatkulov v Turkey (2005) 41 EHRR 25, DFAL’s criterion of serious irreversible harm shows some intersection with the ECtHR’s application of rule 39 relief. [read post]
6 Jul 2017, 2:28 pm
The Secretary of States submissions in Nzolameso, endorsed by Baroness Hale, stressed: that the sending authority must address its mind to, amongst other matters, the need to minimise educational disruption, and must record its reasoning, and be in a position to provide evidence of its contemporary reasoning in court, if called upon to do so. [read post]
27 Jun 2017, 2:58 pm
The dissenting judgments of Baroness Hale and Lord Kerr offer some hope to campaigners, and the appellants will take their case to Strasbourg (despite the earlier case of A, B and C v Ireland, which held that Article 8 rights cannot be interpreted as providing a right to an abortion). [read post]
25 Jun 2017, 10:42 pm
A. v. [read post]
15 Jun 2017, 12:30 pm
See, e.g., Hale v. [read post]
15 Jun 2017, 8:06 am
R (o.t.a A and B) v. [read post]
15 Jun 2017, 1:55 am
Image: Flickr.com R (Kiarie) v Secretary of State for the Home Department; R (Byndloss) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2017] UKSC 42 In a nutshell The Government’s flagship scheme to deport foreign criminals first and hear their appeals later was ruled by the Supreme Court to be incompatible with the appellants’ right to respect for their private and family life (reversing the decision below). [read post]
14 Jun 2017, 1:58 am
Lord Kerr and Baroness Hale gave dissenting judgments. [read post]
13 Jun 2017, 7:34 am
United States, 365 U. [read post]
9 Jun 2017, 5:05 am
In Lucia v SEC, the D.C. [read post]
5 Jun 2017, 10:24 am
” Sadly, today we report the decision in United States v. [read post]
22 May 2017, 1:00 am
R (Kiarie) v Secretary of State for the Home Department; R (Byndloss) v Secretary of State for the Home Department, heard 15-16 February 2017. [read post]
21 May 2017, 2:42 pm
He clearly understood the potential importance of considering her mental state against the background of her imprisonment in Iran. [read post]
16 May 2017, 4:05 am
‘The law on discrimination ought to be easy’, declared Lady Hale giving judgment on behalf of the Supreme Court in Essop v Home Office and Naeem v Secretary of State for Justice [2017] UKSC 27. [read post]
