Search for: "Birmingham v. Smith"
Results 21 - 40
of 83
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
15 Oct 2015, 6:30 am
Butler, John Edward Fowler Distinguished Professor of Law and International Affairs, Pennsylvania State UniversityEDITORIAL BOARDJean Allain, Queen's University, Belfast Olga V. [read post]
23 Apr 2015, 9:20 am
” Smith v. [read post]
25 Feb 2015, 12:50 am
” Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. v. [read post]
24 Oct 2014, 6:08 am
Smith & Nephew, which started the MoM craze with its Birmingham line of MoM devices is also under the gun as well as Wright’s line of Conserve MoM hip implants. [read post]
11 Jul 2014, 5:37 am
United States v. [read post]
10 Jul 2014, 5:00 pm
United States v. [read post]
13 Dec 2013, 9:54 am
Smith & Nephew, Inc., No. 1:13 CV 1220, 2013 U.S. [read post]
10 Dec 2013, 1:48 pm
Yesterday we blogged about Bertini v. [read post]
26 Nov 2013, 3:30 pm
Barking initially proposed that the whole family should return to Nigeria, but after Birmingham City Council v Clue [2011] 1 WLR 99, in view of Ms A’s article 8 application for leave to remain, Barking offered Ms and her two children support and accommodation under s.17 Children Act 1989. [read post]
26 Nov 2013, 3:30 pm
Barking initially proposed that the whole family should return to Nigeria, but after Birmingham City Council v Clue [2011] 1 WLR 99, in view of Ms A’s article 8 application for leave to remain, Barking offered Ms and her two children support and accommodation under s.17 Children Act 1989. [read post]
13 Sep 2013, 9:34 am
Novartis Grimsby Ltd. v. [read post]
11 Sep 2013, 1:14 pm
In McTear v. [read post]
18 Jan 2013, 2:06 pm
This post is by the Reed Smith part of the blog only. [read post]
31 Oct 2012, 9:49 am
Viewed against the recommendations of Brodrick (1971), Luce (2003) and Smith (2003) for a unified system, the creation of a Chief Coroner at national level is a modest development. [read post]
23 Oct 2012, 10:50 pm
Another case including appalling behaviour by the parties, summed up by this quote from HHJ Hayward Smith QC:"...each of them demonstrated deep animosity and total mistrust of the other. [read post]
12 Oct 2012, 5:42 am
Supreme Court Decision, Riegel v. [read post]
22 Jul 2012, 10:25 am
Under Walker v. [read post]
19 Jul 2012, 11:25 pm
See further, Harrow London Borough Council v Qazi [2003] UKHL 43; [2004] 1 A.C. 983; [2003] 3 W.L.R. 792; [2003] H.L.R. 75, per Lord Bingham [22] and Birmingham CC v Doherty [2008] UKHL 57, [2009] 1 A.C. 367, [2008] H.L.R. 45, in the written submissions for Birmingham (noted at 391F-G, 392E-F and per Lord Hope at 401E. [read post]
19 Jul 2012, 11:25 pm
See further, Harrow London Borough Council v Qazi [2003] UKHL 43; [2004] 1 A.C. 983; [2003] 3 W.L.R. 792; [2003] H.L.R. 75, per Lord Bingham [22] and Birmingham CC v Doherty [2008] UKHL 57, [2009] 1 A.C. 367, [2008] H.L.R. 45, in the written submissions for Birmingham (noted at 391F-G, 392E-F and per Lord Hope at 401E. [read post]
6 Jul 2012, 7:09 am
(Very occasionally it can be an issue of enormous and urgent national consequence, such as Bush v. [read post]
