Search for: "AC v. State"
Results 381 - 400
of 1,872
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
1 Dec 2010, 4:35 pm
Lord Phillips also re-named the defence as “honest comment” (as opposed to Court of Appeal in BCA v Singh [2010] EWCA Civ 350, which favoured “honest opinion” [35]) and called on the Law Commission to consider and review the present state of the defence. [read post]
11 Nov 2017, 11:00 am
Sanofi v. [read post]
14 Apr 2009, 11:00 am
McLean v. [read post]
23 Feb 2024, 1:04 pm
The latest is the landmark ruling by Justice Aylen of the Federal Court in Province of Alberta et al v. [read post]
1 Feb 2017, 2:01 pm
In this case, only AC did so. [read post]
29 Mar 2017, 10:42 am
In this case, only AC did so. [read post]
29 Mar 2017, 10:42 am
In this case, only AC did so. [read post]
1 Feb 2017, 2:01 pm
In this case, only AC did so. [read post]
15 May 2018, 6:35 am
The case is styled, Padilla v. [read post]
3 Aug 2010, 10:04 pm
Ultimately, as Lord Hoffmann states in R-v-Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex parte Simms [2000] 2 AC 115, 131, Parliament can, if it chooses, legislate contrary to fundamental principles of human rights (provided it squarely confronts what it is doing). [read post]
21 Dec 2017, 2:57 am
Following Société Eram Shipping Co Ltd v Cie Internationale de Navigation [2003] UKHL 30; [2004] 1 AC 260, this was fatal to the granting of third party debt orders. [read post]
7 Dec 2015, 12:56 pm
* Boards of Appeal tell AC: we were never consultedAs Eponia Emperor’s Mr Battistelli presents to Board 28 an updated proposal addressed to the AC, the Boards’ Praesidium writes to the AC members in frustration, disputing that they were properly consulted, and asking for their voices to be heard. [read post]
26 Oct 2017, 7:29 am
On October 11, 2017, in Spiegel v. [read post]
21 Dec 2017, 4:10 am
As Lord Carnwath concluded after his illuminating discussion of the standard required of planning reasons (at paras 35-42), the question will be “whether the information so provided by the authority leaves room for ‘genuine doubt … as to what (it) has decided and why’” (at para 42, citing Sir Thomas Bingham MR in Clarke Homes Ltd v Secretary of State for the Environment (1993) 66 P & CR 263). [read post]
3 Jan 2011, 10:49 am
Ace American Ins. [read post]
27 Jul 2011, 7:04 am
MBIA, Inc. v. [read post]
4 Nov 2019, 6:47 pm
The following products are subject to recall: 454-g packages containing “SLOW-COOKED BLACK CHICKEN GA AC TIEM CORDYCEPS SINENSIS DONG TRUNG HA THAO” with lot code H9007 and a sell-by date Jan/02/2020 or Jan/25/2020. 454-g packages containing “SLOW-COOKED BLACK CHICKEN GA AC TIEM FIVE SPICE NGU V! [read post]
27 Apr 2012, 10:13 am
It deals with the application of the rule set down 50 years ago in White and Carter (Councils) Limited v McGregor [1962] AC 413 which states that where a party repudiates a contract, the innocent party has the option to either sue for damages or refuse to accept the repudiation and keep the contract alive. [read post]
2 Mar 2023, 5:44 am
In one of the more publicized cases, Merck & Co. v. [read post]
29 Sep 2015, 3:08 pm
The defendants sought dismissal on the ground that BNYM’s put-back claims were time barred under the New York Court of Appeals’ decision in ACE v. [read post]
