Search for: "Smith v. Day" Results 3701 - 3720 of 4,470
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
25 Nov 2010, 4:08 pm by INFORRM
Obtaining an interim injunction in a defamation case has always been very difficult: if a defendant intends to defend the claim on the basis that what is published is true (or any other substantive defence), the court will not grant an interim injunction (Bonnard v Perryman [1891] 2 Ch 269; Holley v Smith [1998] QB 726). [read post]
13 Jan 2022, 9:26 am by Amanda Sanders (UK)
Right to holiday pay for workers– The Court of Appeal will give its decision in Smith v Pimlico Plumbers on the extent of an employer’s liability to pay for holiday in circumstances where the individual was not paid holiday as a consequence of him being treated as self-employed. [read post]
9 Jun 2011, 12:18 pm
Since then the AmeriKat has watched helplessly as not one, not two, but three patent decisions rolled out of the US Supreme Court over the past few days. [read post]
28 Aug 2006, 10:29 am
Louis over the course of 10 days in May, July, and Sept. 2000. [read post]
28 May 2023, 12:15 am by Frank Cranmer
It was alleged that he was guilty of unacceptable professional conduct and/or conduct that might bring the teaching profession into disrepute, in particular: by refusing to use a pupil’s preferred pronoun: by expressing his views to pupils on the wrongfulness of equal marriage and/or homosexuality during Maths lessons; by showing pupils a video) about masculinity which contained inappropriate comments; and by encouraging or directing pupils to watch his YouTube channel/profile which contained… [read post]
9 Nov 2011, 6:33 am by Tejinder Singh
Bennett (echoing the pre-CU decision in FEC v. [read post]
7 Mar 2010, 10:11 am by Michael Ginsborg
" (Freedom to Marry links to the Washington Post's video coverage of the historic day.) [read post]
17 Nov 2023, 4:00 am by Shea Denning
Diaz-Tomas regarding dismissal with leave, the Court’s grant of review in the substitute analyst case of Smith v. [read post]