Search for: "Jackson v. Bryant" Results 21 - 40 of 50
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
30 May 2018, 4:00 am by Ryan Scoville
” As readers know, it’s difficult for the executive to prevail in traditional Category 3 cases, but Zivotofsky v. [read post]
7 Feb 2012, 7:05 am by 1 Crown Office Row
The claimants, Chris Bryant, Lord Prescott, Brian Paddick, Ben Jackson and HJK had alleged that the police had breached their positive obligations under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights by failing to provide them with information about phone hacking, failing to respond to their requests and failing to carry out an effective investigation. [read post]
13 Feb 2012, 1:30 am by INFORRM
The Metropolitan Police conceded the “phone hacking” judicial review case brought by Chris Bryant MP, former Deputy Prime Minister Lord Prescott, ex Deputy Assistant Commissioner Brian Paddick, Ben Jackson and an anonymous claimant, “HJK”, and agreed to a declaration that it had breached the claimants’ Article 8 rights. [read post]
1 Feb 2021, 6:30 am by Guest Blogger
For the Symposium on Mary Ziegler, Abortion and the Law in America: Roe v. [read post]
22 Dec 2008, 10:30 pm
Boyd Bryant, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated Issue: Whether the courts below improperly granted class certification in a suit alleging the sale of more than 4 million vehicles with defective parking-brakes. [read post]
2 Apr 2011, 4:44 am by INFORRM
On Tuesday 29 March 2011, the Home Affairs Select Committee heard evidence from Acting Deputy Commissioner John Yates and Shadow Justice Secretary Chris Bryant MP. [read post]
23 Jan 2012, 2:00 am by INFORRM
These included: Chris Bryant (MP); Sadie Frost; HJK; Gavin Henson; Ben Jackson; Jude Law; Denis MacShane; Ciara Parkes; Guy Pelly; John Prescott; Tom Rowland; Christopher Shipman; and Joan Smith. [read post]
29 Apr 2008, 7:13 am
Jackson, No. 06-5205 Sentence for making false statements to police after defendant entered a plea agreement is affirmed over claims that the district court did not give sufficient consideration to whether she should be sentenced to probation, as defendant waived her right to appeal. . [read post]