Search for: "Word v. Lord"
Results 341 - 360
of 2,054
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
10 Jun 2015, 7:30 am
Supreme Court The appeal was heard by Lord Neuberger, Lord Mance, Lord Clarke, Lord Sumption and Lord Hodge on 18 May 2015. [read post]
13 Nov 2020, 1:45 am
Lord Reed agrees with Lord Kerr. [read post]
8 Jul 2010, 12:30 am
In other words, gay men are to be as free as their straight equivalents in the society concerned to live their lives in the way that is natural to them as gay men, without the fear of persecution. [read post]
7 Dec 2016, 2:11 am
The Justices ask about the wording of the 2011 AV Referendum Act and Chambers QC confirms that he will provide the relevant provision which shows the different wording used, which confirms that Parliament is handing over its sovereignty (in contrast to that used in the 2015 Act). 14:17: Dominic Chambers QC reiterates that the 2015 Act contained no requirement for the UK government to implement the result or set a timeline in relation to the referendum. [read post]
24 May 2019, 4:18 am
For the following three reasons, Lord Hodge held that the Court should not give a technical meaning to the words “suspension and interruption” which, SFC asserted, could be derived from certain civil law systems. [read post]
27 Sep 2016, 4:20 pm
To add more to the plain words of statute, to afford those words a meaning other than what ordinary English requires, seems to this Court to be unnecessary. [read post]
18 May 2018, 8:11 am
Lord Sumption – with whom Lady Hale, Lord Wilson and Lord Lloyd-Jones agreed – found that the proper understanding of party autonomy is that parties may agree to bind their future conduct. [read post]
20 Nov 2016, 6:36 pm
" ICS v West Bromwich (per Lord Hoffmann).So it's not what you, your client or the other side think or wished it means. [read post]
21 Jun 2019, 8:29 am
Supreme Court Judgment The Supreme Court unanimously dismissed Mr Williams’s appeal and upheld the Court of Appeal’s decision, Lord Carnwarth giving the sole judgment. [read post]
5 Mar 2008, 3:12 am
It remains to be seen whether this landmark ruling will be appealed to the House of Lords and we will continue to report developments here on InsureReinsure.com. [read post]
15 Mar 2021, 4:44 am
The Secretary of State maintained that the Supreme Court decisions in R (Unison) v. [read post]
27 Mar 2023, 3:05 am
Z.o.o. and Ors v Jakubowski and Ors. [read post]
12 Nov 2021, 3:17 am
This UK court of appeal judgment Lord Bishop of Leeds v Dixon Coles & Gill [2021] EWCA Civ 1211 considered whether claims arising from one series of related acts or omissions could be aggregated. [read post]
2 Mar 2013, 1:58 am
The defendants argued that the words did not suggest the claimant had broken any rules. [read post]
2 Apr 2017, 4:26 am
There are several other reasons why the decision of the House of Lords in Reynolds v Times Newspapers was aberrant. [read post]
10 Mar 2022, 3:15 am
In conclusion, Lord Briggs said “I consider that the right to manage scheme in Chapter 1 of Part 2 of the 2002 Act makes no provision within the statutory right to manage for management by the RTM company of shared estate facilities. [read post]
5 May 2010, 8:16 am
" Oh and look if you are writing about finance, you shouldn't use the word gain without the other one, you know the l word (no not that l word). [read post]
23 Apr 2008, 1:22 pm
As Lord Diplock said in Gissing v Gissing [1971] AC 886 at 906B-C, “…the relevant intention of each party is the intention which was reasonably understood by the other party to be manifested by that party’s words or conduct notwithstanding that he did not consciously formulate that intention in his own mind or even acted with some different intention which he did not communicate to the other party. [read post]
28 Mar 2015, 5:41 pm
Lord Neuberger thus concluded that, if section 53 was to mean that the Attorney General could veto the decision of the Upper Tribunal simply because he had reasonable (i.e. rational) grounds for disagreeing: …it must be “crystal clear” from the wording of the FOIA 2000, and cannot be justified merely by “general or ambiguous words”. [read post]
29 Oct 2015, 2:00 am
The Seller relied on The Golden Victory (Golden Strait Corporation v. [read post]
