Search for: "Lord v. State"
Results 3681 - 3700
of 4,048
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
4 Nov 2009, 1:14 am
The case of Baillie Estates Ltd v Du Pont (UK) Ltd helps to elucidate some of these questions. [read post]
3 Nov 2009, 4:00 am
Professor Katherine V. [read post]
28 Oct 2009, 10:59 am
The "E-meter" itself is said to cost anywhere from $900 for the Mark V up to $4,650 for the "Mark VII Super Quantum E-meter," which is apparently similar to the Mark V but with super quantum abilities. [read post]
26 Oct 2009, 8:08 pm
State. [read post]
23 Oct 2009, 9:09 am
[See pp. 165-204, on Vásquez.] [read post]
22 Oct 2009, 4:12 pm
Brentwood Borough Council v Ball & Ors [2009] EWHC 2433 (QB) This was the hearing of an application for an injunction by Brentwood BC. [read post]
22 Oct 2009, 4:31 am
The Court: The State of Texas v. [read post]
19 Oct 2009, 11:03 pm
The Court of Appeal disagreed: Airbus v Patel [1997] 2 Lloyds Rep 8; but then the House of Lords agreed with Colman J, holding in effect that the English courts should not act as the world's policemen where a non-contractual anti-suit injunction was sought, as this would be contrary to the principle of comity: Airbus v Patel [1999] 1 AC 119. [read post]
18 Oct 2009, 5:41 am
” DeBoer v. [read post]
15 Oct 2009, 2:53 pm
The LSC argued it was, citing R (Corner House Research) v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry [2005] EWCA Civ 192 and, of course, Weaver v London Quadrant Housing Trust [2009] EWCA Civ 235 (our report here). [read post]
14 Oct 2009, 5:30 am
Kaufman v. [read post]
13 Oct 2009, 3:01 am
Security Council Resolution 1373 (Sept. 28, 2001), a post-9/11 measure entitled "Threats to international peace and security caused by terrorist acts" that imposed on U.N. member states duties intended to combat the financing of terrorism. [read post]
13 Oct 2009, 12:14 am
In EI Du Pont Nemours & Co v United Kingdom Intellectual Property Office [2009] EWCA Civ 966, dated 17 September 2009 but only recently made publicly available (see the SPC blog for more), the Honourable Lord Justice Jacob writes:"Under the SPC scheme an SPC has to be applied for in each Member State where it is wanted - there is no central scheme. [read post]
12 Oct 2009, 8:24 am
The People's Republic of Bangladesh v. [read post]
12 Oct 2009, 6:16 am
Zehentner v Austria, a judgment of the First Section of the European Court of Human Rights, demonstrates yet again that the ECHR has a different approach to mandatory rights to possession than the House of Lords has expressed in the trilogy of cases (Buckley, Connors, McCann and Cosic against Qazi, Kay, Doherty). [read post]
12 Oct 2009, 12:01 am
By uttering the Lord’s Prayer in the exercise of his official duties, the Emperor necessarily mixed church and state. [read post]
9 Oct 2009, 4:25 am
Ltd. v. [read post]
1 Oct 2009, 9:46 pm
I am thankful to my friend Eugene White for drawing to my attention a recent case from the ACT where a solicitor, David Landers, had some difficulties in dealing with ACT authorities on behalf of his client, a teacher who wanted to retire and get a payout due to illness.Because of the significance of this decision, I have set out the judgment in full.DAVID LANDER v COUNCIL OF THE LAW SOCIETY OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY[2009] ACTSC 117 (11 September 2009)APPEAL - Appeal against… [read post]
25 Sep 2009, 11:24 am
In Epperson v. [read post]
24 Sep 2009, 5:11 am
Such an approach is also supported by a decision of the House of Lords in Clark v. [read post]
