Search for: "ENGLAND v. STATE" Results 361 - 380 of 3,656
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
4 May 2012, 5:46 pm by INFORRM
The Upper Tribunal has handed down judgment in the case of Raed Mahajna v Secretary of State for the Home Department IA/21/21631/2011. [read post]
1 May 2023, 3:35 pm
"... when interpreting ambiguous federal laws, a deference long targeted by conservatives concerned about the power of the administrative state. [read post]
30 Nov 2012, 5:54 am
Hurricane Sandy caused massive devastation across the eastern United States, destroying property, displacing people, and disrupting communications and transportation from Pennsylvania up to New England. [read post]
14 Dec 2015, 4:05 am by Howard Friedman
In Naeem v The Secretary of State for Justice, (EWCA, Dec. 9, 2015) , the England and Wales Court of Appeal held that discrimination was not the cause of the average pay of Muslim prison chaplains in British prisons being lower on average than that of Christian chaplains. [read post]
7 Dec 2015, 4:23 pm by INFORRM
It applied as much to a claimant who had never resided in England as to one who was resident or domiciled there. [read post]
9 Jul 2010, 9:32 am by John J Downes
The risk arose out of what C had chosen to do not as a result of the state of the premises and therefore there was no breach of duty. [read post]
3 Jun 2009, 1:28 am
As this court explained in New England Braiding Co. v. [read post]
10 Apr 2019, 9:30 pm by Mitra Sharafi
Islam v Secretary of State for the Home Department, R v Immigration Appeal Tribunal and Another, ex parte Shah (1999) Nora Honkala72. [read post]
24 Jan 2012, 2:51 pm by Phil Cave
  While some of the England [United States v. [read post]
19 Apr 2011, 6:25 pm by Thaddeus Mason Pope, J.D., Ph.D.
 Similarly condemning non-transparent, non-consensual stopping of life support is a recent case from the John Radcliffe Hospital in Oxford, England. [read post]
5 Mar 2013, 12:31 pm by L. Gopika
 Justice Arnold stated that Defendants were service providers within the meaning of the 1988 Act as this question had already been settled in Dramatico v. [read post]