Search for: "Barber v. Barber"
Results 361 - 380
of 498
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
5 May 2010, 8:43 am
One of these Complaints, filed last month in Barber v. [read post]
25 Sep 2020, 12:41 pm
DJCIS, and again in its recent decision, Doe v. [read post]
19 Sep 2019, 10:37 am
Borello & Sons, Inc. v. [read post]
8 Jan 2018, 4:19 am
There is an interesting pointtaken about an omission to act operating as an assurance, and here (reading between the lines) HHJ Matthews appears to have applied (at [102]) something like the probanda in Willmott v Barber, although this is not expressly cited in the judgment and would be rather odd given its lack of authority in modern estoppel doctrine. [read post]
2 Jan 2011, 2:42 am
Date Case Name Reference Court Subject Matter Posts Final win - C or D 15.12.10 Shergill v Purewal Sir Charles Gray Libel Summary Determination D 13.12.10 Smith v ADVFN [2010] EWHC 3255 (QB) Tugendhat J Libel Summary Determination D 3.12.10 Lait v Evening Standard (No.2) [2010] EWHC 3239 (QB) Eady J Libel Fair Comment Summary Determination D 24.11.10 Daniels v BBC [2010] EWHC 3057 (QB) Sharp J Libel Strike Out 5RB D … [read post]
5 Oct 2020, 6:30 am
Lawrence v. [read post]
23 Feb 2013, 6:24 am
Consider Lawrence v. [read post]
6 Jul 2015, 2:05 am
In the cavernous main hall, President Marianne Barber formally opened the conference and the stage was set for the opening lecture. [read post]
24 Apr 2023, 12:36 pm
The case is People v. [read post]
16 Jan 2018, 11:00 am
(Click here for more on northern spotted v. barred.) [read post]
5 Aug 2007, 5:35 am
We also affirm the district court's decisions on each of the defendant's six cross-appeals. 07a0291p.06 2007/08/02 Barber v. [read post]
25 Jan 2014, 4:15 am
’ ” Barber v. [read post]
20 Jun 2010, 6:27 am
The Press Gazette reports the judgment under the headline Lynn Barber libel victory ‘raises bar’ for claimants. [read post]
7 Nov 2011, 6:16 am
Ltd. v. [read post]
28 Jul 2014, 2:24 pm
Barber v London Borough of Croydon [2010] EWCA Civ 51 (our report here) was referred to and followed in finding it was not reasonable of Peabody to have done nothing except the referrals to the welfare benefits team, as Peabody had failed to follow their own policy. [read post]
17 Sep 2019, 9:42 am
AB 5 codifies the “ABC” test for employee status adopted by the California Supreme Court’s 2018 decision in Dynamex v. [read post]
16 Sep 2010, 5:14 am
Vecellio & Grogan, Inc. v. [read post]
18 May 2017, 7:47 am
Those efforts were shot down in Loving v. [read post]
13 Aug 2008, 6:03 am
And again from Mike at C&F (who is just posting one great thing after another), the 8th Circuit decision in U.S. v. [read post]
12 Aug 2007, 3:55 pm
I have in mind the recent book by Sotirios Barber and Jim Fleming, Constitutional Interpretation: The Basic Questions. [read post]
