Search for: "In Re: White v."
Results 3621 - 3640
of 4,470
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
23 Jun 2010, 2:50 am
(The Knowsley argument, paralleling the finding on assured tenants on Knowsley Housing Trust v White, link to our report) ii) Brent v Knightley was wrongly decided, such that the right to apply under s.85 Housing Act 1985 survived the (ex) tenant's death iii) Such a right to apply is a possession under article 1, Protocol 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights iv) To hold that the right to apply did not survive death would be in breach of Art 1 Protocol 1… [read post]
23 Jun 2010, 2:50 am
(The Knowsley argument, paralleling the finding on assured tenants on Knowsley Housing Trust v White, link to our report) ii) Brent v Knightley was wrongly decided, such that the right to apply under s.85 Housing Act 1985 survived the (ex) tenant's death iii) Such a right to apply is a possession under article 1, Protocol 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights iv) To hold that the right to apply did not survive death would be in breach of Art 1 Protocol 1… [read post]
23 Jun 2010, 1:30 am
In Flux v. [read post]
22 Jun 2010, 3:40 pm
Kelly v. [read post]
22 Jun 2010, 1:34 pm
The White House is functioning like an absolute dictatorship at odds with more than 70% of the people. [read post]
21 Jun 2010, 2:03 pm
Whites 2. [read post]
18 Jun 2010, 5:25 pm
re v Romania ((2005) 41 EHRR 200, [91]), in each case without any analysis of the point. [read post]
18 Jun 2010, 5:37 am
White initiated an investigation. . . [read post]
17 Jun 2010, 1:59 pm
U.S. v. [read post]
17 Jun 2010, 5:00 am
See Gibson v. [read post]
16 Jun 2010, 3:50 pm
The difference in presenting data to a jury v. to a judge is a big one. [read post]
16 Jun 2010, 3:39 pm
” Moss: the networks have a white-coat rule: a non-doctor should not be wearing a white coat in an ad, and you could bring that to their attention if they missed it. [read post]
16 Jun 2010, 10:07 am
Nope, they’re harassing a Harvard kid whose only crime is failing to fill out proper papers when he was four. [read post]
15 Jun 2010, 7:50 pm
(Maier & Maier) US Patents – Decisions CAFC: Defendant may defeat false patent marking claim by showing no intent to deceive: Pequignot v Solo Cup Company (IP Spotlight) (Patently-O) (GRAY on Claims) (Florida IP) (Inventive Step) Two Strykes and you're out - Fed. [read post]
15 Jun 2010, 1:36 pm
If you're poor and not yet convicted, you may get the benefit of a Strickland v. [read post]
15 Jun 2010, 11:09 am
Fisher also said that Hamdi v. [read post]
13 Jun 2010, 9:50 pm
Check out Scott Greenfield's post on Berghuis v. [read post]
12 Jun 2010, 12:20 am
Back in 1834, the Supreme Court decided in Wheaton v. [read post]
11 Jun 2010, 12:01 pm
And we're off. [read post]
11 Jun 2010, 5:00 am
Bigger, Stronger, Faster: The PCAOB After The Supreme Court Ruling by Francine McKenna at re: The Auditors The Supreme Court will decide on Free Enterprise Fund v. [read post]
