Search for: "BARKER v. BARKER."
Results 401 - 420
of 691
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
13 May 2011, 11:01 am
Birmingham City Council v Barker (Equal Pay Act : Other establishments) (Rev 1) [2010] UKEAT 0056_10_0905 (9 May 2011) – Read jugment One of the allegations made about contingency fees is that they encourage lawyers to cut corners because they are not paid by the hour. [read post]
9 May 2011, 7:11 am
Concerned Dog Owners of California v. [read post]
5 May 2011, 8:39 am
In U.S. v. [read post]
25 Apr 2011, 9:15 am
In U.S. v. [read post]
22 Apr 2011, 7:31 am
Barker, V. (2011), Decarceration. [read post]
5 Apr 2011, 11:04 pm
Bolling v. [read post]
30 Mar 2011, 3:45 pm
In Randall and Pepmeier, et al v. [read post]
24 Mar 2011, 9:32 am
In U.S. v. [read post]
22 Mar 2011, 1:27 pm
A Frye hearing gets its name from Frye v. [read post]
11 Mar 2011, 1:35 am
That relaxation was developed in the subsequent House of Lords decision in Barker v Corus and by the introduction of section 3 of the Compensation Act 2006. [read post]
9 Mar 2011, 2:17 am
In Barker v Corus [2006] UKHL 20 the House of Lords answered this question by refining the exception so as to render each employer liable only for the proportion of damages which represented his contribution to the risk. [read post]
21 Feb 2011, 11:20 am
AbortionKF228.R59 H85 2010Roe v. [read post]
15 Feb 2011, 4:17 pm
Related Web Resource: Barker v. [read post]
10 Feb 2011, 6:15 am
Latest case in point: Barker v. [read post]
3 Feb 2011, 4:15 am
Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Llewellyn v Lorey & Anor [2011] EWCA Civ 37 (03 February 2011) Glaves v Crown Prosecution Service [2011] EWCA Civ 69 (03 February 2011) Bowater v Northwest London Hospitals NHS Trust [2011] EWCA Civ 63 (03 February 2011) Uren v Corporate Leisure (UK) Ltd [2011] EWCA Civ 66 (02 February 2011) HSBC Bank Plc v Brophy [2011] EWCA Civ 67 (02 February 2011) Morgan v The Spirit Group Ltd [2011] EWCA Civ 68 (02… [read post]
27 Jan 2011, 5:02 am
In Barker v. [read post]
12 Jan 2011, 5:00 am
According to Bill Barker writing for the Motley Fool, the “typical” expense ratio for an actively management mutual fund is 1.5%. [read post]
8 Jan 2011, 5:06 am
This claim is analyzed under the four-factor balancing test set forth in Barker v Wingo, 407 US 514 (1972). [read post]
29 Dec 2010, 1:29 pm
The first example offered is the facts of Cook v Lewis. [read post]
22 Dec 2010, 10:25 am
In Trinity Homes v. [read post]
