Search for: "Fell v. Fell"
Results 3801 - 3820
of 12,743
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
12 Mar 2019, 5:32 pm
Butler-Sloss P held that the case fell within the developing domestic law of confidence. [read post]
27 Apr 2020, 2:00 am
On Wednesday 29 April 2020, the Supreme Court will hear the appeal of The Advocate General representing the Commissioners of HMRC v K E Entertainments Ltd (Scotland) .This appeal will consider whether the taxpayer (K E Entertainment Ltd)’s claim to a repayment of VAT fell within the scope of the Principal VAT Directive, Articles 73 and 90, together with (if necessary) VAT Regulation 38 (as the taxpayer contends) or within VAT Act section 80 and is therefore time-barred (as… [read post]
14 Oct 2007, 5:22 am
OpinionShort Title/District 07a0410p.06 Stewart v. [read post]
2 May 2012, 9:44 am
In Hymas, a contractor fell into an unguarded trench. [read post]
17 Jan 2017, 4:41 pm
On 30 November 2016, the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) heard oral arguments in Bărbulescu v. [read post]
28 May 2012, 5:08 am
It therefore fell to the Court to determine if there was any qualification or exception to the time limit. [read post]
13 Feb 2023, 9:11 am
Shortly after the second sale fell through the parties discussed how Barton might recover his wasted outlay. [read post]
10 Jul 2008, 9:49 pm
In Anjou v. [read post]
7 Sep 2010, 12:18 pm
Vazquez v. [read post]
8 Sep 2021, 9:00 am
The court, citing Cooksey v. [read post]
8 Mar 2012, 7:23 am
Here, the EEOC fell short. [read post]
8 Mar 2012, 7:23 am
Here, the EEOC fell short. [read post]
13 Jul 2011, 11:57 am
In Desrosiers v. [read post]
19 Aug 2008, 10:49 am
Case Name: Nagle v. [read post]
21 Sep 2016, 1:58 am
In Newman v. [read post]
22 Jun 2020, 1:42 am
This appeal considers whether the taxpayer (K E Entertainment Ltd)’s claim to a repayment of value added tax (VAT) fell within the scope of the Principal VAT Directive, Articles 73 and 90, together with (if necessary) VAT Regulation 38 (as the taxpayer contends) or within VAT Act section 80 and is therefore time-barred (as the Commissioners contend). [read post]
2 Nov 2016, 12:55 pm
The attorney maintained that a chest X-ray and colonoscopy fell outside the area where the drugs were allegedly secreted. [read post]
3 Jul 2012, 6:39 am
Koch v. [read post]
8 May 2014, 9:59 pm
Spicer v. [read post]
4 Aug 2008, 8:03 am
(v) if those allegations were justiciable, should the court exercise its jurisdiction be exercised in this case? [read post]
