Search for: "Lady v State"
Results 401 - 420
of 1,759
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
7 Oct 2019, 4:23 pm
On 6 and 7 November 2019 the Supreme Court (Lady Hale and Lords Reed, Kerr, Hodge and Lloyd-Jones) will hear the appeal in the data protection case of W M Morrisons Supermarkets plc v Various Claimants. [read post]
7 Oct 2019, 10:09 am
One especially memorable case was Finkel v. [read post]
1 Oct 2019, 9:01 pm
Bush v. [read post]
25 Sep 2019, 2:00 pm
But lady luck was not on their side. [read post]
19 Sep 2019, 1:25 am
Requests Ronan Lavery QC not abuse Lady Hale’s politeness. 11:27: Ronan Lavery QC submits the Government’s policy would be constitutional. [read post]
18 Sep 2019, 1:18 am
It is noted by him that this principle has not been developed to the same degree in Scotland as it may have been south of the border. 1544: Aidan O’Neill QC states that there is no ‘No-deal’ statute. 1542: Lady Hale states that there is always a difficulty faced by the courts as to whether the court should accept the agreement of the parties (referring to the Miller case). [read post]
17 Sep 2019, 1:26 am
Lord Keen QC submits that this reasoning was disregarded by the Inner House in favour of an inference. 15:52: Lady Black asked if Parliament could have decided not to go into recess. [read post]
16 Sep 2019, 7:28 am
In England & Wales, Gina Millar (the businesswoman who brought the UK Supreme Court appeal of R (on the application of Miller and another) v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union [2017] UKSC 5) also raised proceedings, following the Queen’s signing of the Order in Council. [read post]
2 Sep 2019, 5:52 am
This has been repeatedly confirmed both by local courts and the ECtHR (P v Poland [2012] ECHR 1853). [read post]
1 Sep 2019, 5:38 am
Ironically, Totenberg pointed out, Roberts wrote the dissent from Ginsburg’s 5-4 opinion four years earlier in Arizona State Legislature v. [read post]
27 Aug 2019, 4:00 pm
The state’s standing argument didn’t fly, in light of the recent US Supreme Court case of Byrd v. [read post]
25 Aug 2019, 8:42 am
Facts: This case (Nemes et al v. [read post]
23 Aug 2019, 11:44 am
In Eoff v. [read post]
20 Aug 2019, 5:06 am
“Lady” detective. [read post]
18 Aug 2019, 3:41 am
In the ensuing case, United States v. [read post]
12 Aug 2019, 1:42 pm
Squire v. [read post]
12 Aug 2019, 12:09 pm
Emma DiNapoli and Jacques Singer-Emery described the latest developments of the military commission in United States v. [read post]
11 Aug 2019, 9:51 am
There are certain exceptions, including at s.113(3)(a), which states that subsection (1) does not prevent “a claim for judicial review”. [read post]
29 Jul 2019, 1:00 am
Patel v Secretary of State for the Home Department; Secretary of State for the Home Department v Shah, heard 7 May 2019. [read post]
26 Jul 2019, 7:42 am
Ricks v. [read post]
