Search for: "Word v. Lord"
Results 381 - 400
of 2,056
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
21 Jun 2019, 8:29 am
Supreme Court Judgment The Supreme Court unanimously dismissed Mr Williams’s appeal and upheld the Court of Appeal’s decision, Lord Carnwarth giving the sole judgment. [read post]
20 Jun 2019, 4:00 am
. *** A quick word on my approach: At first, I took a sample of 400 cases from each year where CanLII’s coverage is complete for the Cour du Québec (2003 to 2017 inclusively), out of a population of about 19,000 decisions issued per year. [read post]
17 Jun 2019, 1:00 am
The proposed panel for hand down is Lord Reed, Lady Black, Lord Lloyd-Jones and Lord Sales. [read post]
12 Jun 2019, 4:42 pm
As predicted by various commentators giving a preview of the case (including in my previous post), the five Supreme Court judges (Lord Kerr, Lord Wilson, Lord Sumption, Lord Hodge and Lord Briggs) clarified the applicable law, but unanimously dismissed the appeals against the Court of Appeal decision ([2017] EWCA Civ 1334) on the facts. [read post]
12 Jun 2019, 2:32 am
In a judgment delivered by Lord Sumption, the Supreme Court unanimously held that section 1 not only raises the threshold of seriousness from that in Jameel and Thornton, but requires its application to be determined by reference to the actual facts about its impact not merely the meaning of the words [12]. [read post]
2 Jun 2019, 4:31 pm
Toronto has the most diverse population in Canada, and possibly the word. [read post]
27 May 2019, 4:35 pm
The first strand Mr Sterling emphasised the importance of the headline, in particular Lord Nicholls’ observation that “Those who print defamatory headlines are playing with fire” (Charleston v News Group Newspapers Limited [1995] 2 AC 65, 74). [read post]
24 May 2019, 4:18 am
For the following three reasons, Lord Hodge held that the Court should not give a technical meaning to the words “suspension and interruption” which, SFC asserted, could be derived from certain civil law systems. [read post]
23 May 2019, 4:26 am
Relying on R (Cart) v The Upper Tribunal [2011] UKSC 28, the majority noted that there is a strong interpretative presumption against the exclusion of judicial review, other than by “the most clear and explicit words” (Laws LJ in Cart at the Court of Appeal). [read post]
22 May 2019, 4:58 pm
Relying on R (Cart) v The Upper Tribunal [2011] UKSC 28, the majority noted that there is a strong interpretative presumption against the exclusion of judicial review, other than by “the most clear and explicit words” (Laws LJ in Cart at the Court of Appeal). [read post]
21 May 2019, 5:23 am
Has Chavez-Vilchez altered the approach to derivative claims for residence in the UK? [read post]
15 May 2019, 3:02 am
Lord Wilson’s dissent centred on the precise wording of s 67(8). [read post]
14 May 2019, 9:27 am
“[U]sers can easily create specific searches, including all Sherlock Holmes works posted in 2018 that are exactly 221 words long and Lord of The Rings/Game of Thrones crossovers that don't include either Frodo Baggins or Arya Stark. [read post]
10 May 2019, 6:05 am
Lord Sumption expressly rejec [read post]
6 May 2019, 7:05 am
In Matter of W.K. v. [read post]
4 May 2019, 12:39 pm
See Hay v. [read post]
3 May 2019, 4:06 pm
His Honour commenced the lengthy judgment with a quote from Lord Devlin in 1963: “a man who wants to talk at large about smoke may have to pick his words very carefully if he wants to exclude the suggestion that there is also a fire, … the critical question is whether the media respondents heeded Lord Devlin’s cautionary words, or whether their reporting of suspicions or allegations that the applicant was somehow implicated in a… [read post]
29 Apr 2019, 4:14 pm
On 8 April 2019, spent the best part of a day reading the UK government’s Online Harms White Paper, I concluded that if the road to hell was paved with good intentions, this was a motorway. [read post]
24 Apr 2019, 7:28 am
In support of the first ground, the Claimants relied heavily on Gulati v MGN Ltd [2015] EWHC 1482 (Ch), upheld by the Court of Appeal in Representative Claimants v MGN Ltd [2015] EWCA Civ 1291. [read post]
23 Apr 2019, 9:35 am
The case reminds me of Kalman v. [read post]
