Search for: "State v. Banerjee"
Results 21 - 39
of 39
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
1 Feb 2012, 4:08 pm
Swire, Ohio State University (OSU) – Michael E. [read post]
17 Oct 2011, 6:45 am
Banerjee said. [read post]
22 May 2011, 4:34 am
Narayana Rao AIR 1983 Mad 9, Aparna Banerjee v. [read post]
16 Feb 2011, 6:52 am
Nevertheless, the newspaper repeated the defamation: in an article alongside a photograph of Watters the newspaper had stated: We may have to apologise to this revolting pervert but will we mean it? [read post]
12 Feb 2011, 8:12 am
(Vide: State of Bihar & Ors. v. [read post]
26 Oct 2010, 5:21 pm
But as was stated in Re S, there is no presumptive priority between ECHR rights. [read post]
18 Oct 2010, 10:55 am
State of Bihar be shapeless, formless like Agni or Vayu , or even a simple piece of wood. [read post]
12 Sep 2010, 12:48 pm
Gomtibai v. [read post]
28 Jul 2010, 8:14 am
Supreme Court Morrison Sports Ltd & Ors v Scottish Power [2010] UKSC 37 (28 July 2010) Star Energy Weald Basin Ltd & Anor v Bocardo SA [2010] UKSC 35 (28 July 2010) O’ Brien v Ministry of Justice [2010] UKSC 34 (28 July 2010) ZO (Somalia) & Ors, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2010] UKSC 36 (28 July 2010) Rollins, R v [2010] UKSC 39 (28 July 2010) Court of Appeal (Civil Division)… [read post]
19 Jul 2010, 1:05 am
Banerjee ([2005) 1 AC 253), coupled with the recent emphasis by Strasbourg on reputation as a right under Art.8, has served to revive the debate as to whether the rule in Bonnard v. [read post]
16 Jul 2010, 3:52 am
In such circumstances, and against the backdrop of the law generally in this field being in a state of rapid flux at this time, the Court of Appeal in Greene might certainly be forgiven if, with the benefit of hindsight, it appears that it failed to apply Re S correctly. [read post]
14 Jul 2010, 10:32 am
Section 12(3) of the Act was interpreted by the House of Lords in Cream Holdings Ltd v Banerjee ([2004] UKHL 44) to mean that, in order to obtain an interim injunction, the claimant must ordinarily show (at least) that his claim is more likely than not to succeed at trial. [read post]
3 May 2010, 2:36 am
His submission, by David Pannick and David Sherborne, sets out UK authority (such as the the Spycatcher case, Lord Woolf in the Flitcroft decision, the House of Lords decision in Cream Holdings v Banerjee, and the Court of Appeal in Douglas v Hello! [read post]
28 Feb 2010, 7:31 am
These delays have taken place in many of the recent privacy and confidence actions, for example, Lord Browne v Associated Newspapers, Napier v Pressdram, and Cream Holdings v Banerjee. [read post]
25 Sep 2008, 6:07 pm
(Stanford University)Alexis Marcus (Northwestern University)Alvarez Fernando (University of Chicago)Andersen Torben (Northwestern University)Baliga Sandeep (Northwestern University)Banerjee Abhijit V. [read post]
18 Aug 2008, 11:51 am
Ltd. v. [read post]
13 Feb 2008, 1:54 pm
Jones, Jr. v. [read post]
17 Sep 2007, 4:04 pm
The suit is Chambers v. [read post]
20 Jun 2007, 5:14 am
In Cream v Banerjee Lord Nicholls addressed this provision and said it demanded flexibility in its application. [read post]
