Search for: "Hale v. Harm"
Results 21 - 40
of 226
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
5 Mar 2014, 2:11 am
Under Arts 17 and 29 of the Convention, damages can only be awarded for harm to passengers in cases of death or bodily injury. [read post]
12 Jul 2010, 7:47 am
U.S. v. [read post]
12 Jul 2010, 7:47 am
U.S. v. [read post]
19 Jan 2015, 1:49 am
Lords Neuberger, Clarke, Wilson, Toulson and Lady Hale will hear the appeal. [read post]
8 Jul 2010, 3:35 pm
USA v. [read post]
8 Jul 2016, 9:20 am
A few weeks ago, the Georgia Court of Appeals handed down an interesting decision in Baskin v. [read post]
7 Mar 2014, 1:34 am
This principle was famously laid down in the case of Sidhu v British Airways (where passengers could not sue at common law for harm resulting from their plane having been high jacked following the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait), and subsequently applied by senior courts around the world, including notably the United States Supreme Court in El Al Israel Airlines v Tseng (though Justice Stevens there dissented). [read post]
5 Jul 2010, 10:57 am
Hale, 2010 WL 1609274 (N.J. [read post]
28 Jan 2011, 8:53 am
Baroness Hale made clear that the question for the local authority (following on from Birmingham CC v Ali – our note here) is essentially about the future, ie the probability of the acts continuing in the future (“This is the limiting factor. [read post]
27 Jan 2016, 2:36 am
Lady Hale recognised the public right to information about decisions concerning notorious criminals, but this needed to be balanced against the potential harm to the patient, should their identities be exposed. [read post]
11 Feb 2010, 4:58 am
Notably, in R v. [read post]
29 Jul 2015, 3:54 am
Lord Hale stated the appellant was clearly entitled to a declaration that the application of the settlement criterion breached her rights under art 14 and A2P1 of the convention. [read post]
17 Mar 2011, 9:15 pm
United States v. [read post]
29 Oct 2012, 5:14 pm
U.S. v. [read post]
3 May 2017, 8:09 am
The decision-makers involved rejected the possibility that they faced a real risk of serious irreversible harm if removed from the UK while the outcome of any appeal was pending. [read post]
30 Jan 2016, 4:32 am
That was the difficult question the Supreme Court had to grapple with in the case of R(C) v. [read post]
24 May 2011, 8:40 am
On 9 March 2011, the Supreme Court handed down its judgment in the joint appeal of Sienkiewicz v Grief (UK) Ltd; Knowsley MBC v Willmore [2011] UKSC 10. [read post]
15 Feb 2012, 1:33 am
Savage; Powell v United Kingdom [2000] 30 EHRR CD 362). [read post]
20 Feb 2015, 4:57 am
Lady Hale supported Lord Kerr’s analysis. [read post]
20 May 2015, 4:09 am
The law The tort of intentionally causing physical or psychological harm was first established in 1897 in the case of Wilkinson v Downton. [read post]
