Search for: "State v. Makee R."
Results 361 - 380
of 34,863
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
13 Jun 2014, 8:46 pm
The main issue in R v Spencer 2014 SCC 43 was whether a user of the Internet has a reasonable expectation of privacy in his or her basic subscriber information held by the user’s ISP that prevents the police from obtaining this information from the ISP without a warrant or court order. [read post]
8 May 2012, 4:30 am
South Carolina v. [read post]
8 May 2012, 4:30 am
South Carolina v. [read post]
15 Oct 2019, 11:31 am
In particular, in Georgia v. [read post]
17 Jan 2019, 11:06 am
State v. [read post]
5 Apr 2016, 11:51 am
In Dimmett v. [read post]
2 Jul 2019, 9:28 am
The judges’ conclusions on the key issues In order to make good an art 14 claim, a claimant has to establish that (a) the circumstances fall within the ambit of a substantive Convention right, (b) the claimant has a relevant status for the purposes of art 14, (c) they have been treated differently from others in a similar situation, by reason of their status; if so the burden is then on the state to demonstrate (d) whether the difference in treatment is objectively justified.… [read post]
15 Dec 2021, 4:27 am
Under those principles, as they apply in the United Kingdom, law-making is generally the function of the legislature. [read post]
23 Mar 2010, 8:57 am
R. [read post]
2 Feb 2022, 3:22 am
The appellants argued specific statutory rights are not to be cut down by subordinate legislation passed under the vires of a different Act, a rule identified in the case of R v Secretary of State for Social Security, Ex p Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants [1997] 1 WLR 275 (“JCWI”). [read post]
29 Jul 2015, 3:00 am
Giving the lead judgment Lord Reed stated that the decisions taken to authorise the segregation under the Prison Rules 1999, rule 45(2), was not taken by the Secretary of State but instead by a senior prison officer. [read post]
9 Oct 2019, 7:21 am
The courts are also disinclined to decide Article 14 cases on the basis that the comparators are not in an analogous situation other than in very obvious cases: see R (Carson) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [2005] UKHL 37. [read post]
31 Dec 2019, 4:47 am
State v. [read post]
6 Jan 2015, 6:35 am
Power Co. v. [read post]
25 Jul 2016, 9:43 am
Colvin, United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, June 29, 2016 More Blog Entries: Stacy v. [read post]
2 Nov 2010, 4:20 am
United States v. [read post]
14 Dec 2009, 2:05 am
Every law that aggravates a crime, or makes it greater than it was, when committed. 3rd. [read post]
12 Aug 2015, 10:05 pm
R. [read post]
1 Sep 2012, 9:30 am
The brief and a summary of its argument are available here: In 2010, the Supreme Court decided United States v. [read post]
3 Apr 2010, 6:20 am
Furthermore, Innospec’s agents also requested further funds in order to make corrupt payments to a rival agent – Wisnu – who had apparently been tasked with marketing Chinese-sourced TEL to Pertamina.83. [read post]
