Search for: "Lord v. State"
Results 3821 - 3840
of 4,048
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
9 Oct 2008, 7:53 pm
In the US, it was found in the 1990s that a prohibition on automatic telephone direct marketing that applied to political campaigning was constitutional: the case is Van Bergen v Minnesota 59 F.3d 1541 (8th Circuit CA). [read post]
17 Apr 2013, 11:30 am
Wells noted the Supreme Court’s decision in Kiobel v. [read post]
19 Jul 2012, 5:58 am
Readers may recall that this is the case in which Lord Justice Jacob, as he then was, trenchantly stated that " ... if Neurim are wrong, then the Regulation will not have achieved its key objects for large areas of pharmaceutical research: it will not be fit for purpose. [read post]
31 Aug 2010, 12:13 am
The first of these arguments had been considered and rejected by the Supreme Court in State of Maharashtra v. [read post]
15 Jun 2011, 2:01 am
Section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000, which permitted suspicionless stops and searches to be carried out by the police in connection with counter-terrorism policing, was declared illegal by the ECHR in Gillan and Quinton v UK. [read post]
18 Jan 2011, 10:44 am
They even exist in some U.S. states. [read post]
22 Nov 2011, 3:35 am
It's an attack on money itself, the Buckly v. [read post]
18 Mar 2012, 9:44 pm
As Lord Hoffmann said in 2005, a GAAR may be a cure that is worse than the disease.Treaty Override and Certificate of Residency The GAAR also contains a non-obtstante clause providing that it overrides “anything contained in the Act” (thereby including section 90). [read post]
14 Apr 2011, 2:11 am
. 'Nerd' fails to gain an entry, notwithstanding the consideration of this word by Lords Justices Jacob and Pill in the patent appeal of Rockwater v Technip (here). [read post]
16 Dec 2009, 5:01 am
On the evidence, that defence was bound to fail.The Court of Appeal (Lords Justices Rix, Jacob -- who gave the judgment to which all three judges contributed -- and Patten) dismissed Lucasfilm's appeal but allowed Ainsworth's in part. [read post]
29 Mar 2012, 7:30 am
As the Supreme Court said in 1895, in Coffin v. [read post]
10 Jun 2009, 3:30 am
(I will leave aside the problem created by the Schoon v. [read post]
15 Dec 2008, 4:14 pm
By Connor Moyle A recent appellate decision, Starbucks Corp. v. [read post]
6 Nov 2020, 12:50 pm
Supreme Court in Brownback v. [read post]
7 Dec 2016, 4:32 pm
Mr Briggs is in a minimally conscious state and his family has requested that his life-sustaining treatment be withdrawn. [read post]
9 Apr 2013, 4:00 am
As Lord Henry Brougham declared and the Supreme Court of Canada embraced in R v. [read post]
19 Aug 2011, 2:08 pm
In 1982 in a case called R. v. [read post]
5 May 2011, 5:25 pm
” He also referred to the Flood v Times case, on its way to the Supreme Court. [read post]
14 Jan 2013, 1:56 pm
Such, also, was the Declaration of Right presented by the Lords and Commons to the Prince of Orange in 1688, and afterwards thrown into the form of an act of parliament called the Bill of Rights. [read post]
15 Jun 2010, 10:00 pm
But does the finality of an adoption order in technical legal terms override the protection extended by the Convention to what may be called, for want of a better phrase, the undeniable biological state of things? [read post]
