Search for: "Paras v. State"
Results 4281 - 4300
of 6,183
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
2 Nov 2011, 3:17 am
Julian Assange -v- Swedish Prosecution Authority – Read judgment / summary Julian Assange, founder of the whistle-blowing website Wikileaks, has lost his High Court appeal against extradition to Sweden. [read post]
2 Nov 2011, 2:00 am
French courts give conflicting answers in preliminary injunction proceedings: Actavis v Novartis (EPLAW) Vytorin (Ezetimibe and Simvastatin) – US: Schering files patent infringement complaint against Actavis in response to Para IV certification (Patent Docs) [read post]
31 Oct 2011, 9:26 am
C 11-03992 CRB, appears at CCH 2011-2 Trade Cases ¶77,653. [read post]
29 Oct 2011, 8:22 am
Limited v. [read post]
29 Oct 2011, 8:22 am
Limited v. [read post]
29 Oct 2011, 5:36 am
State v. [read post]
28 Oct 2011, 1:49 pm
Advanced Medical Optics Inc., CCH State Unfair Trade Practices Law ¶32,337.Further details regarding CCH State Unfair Trade Practices Law appear here. [read post]
27 Oct 2011, 7:55 am
Insurance Corporation of British Columbia, 1999 BCCA 281, 126 B.C.A.C. 144, where Madam Justice Ryan, for the Court, stated at para. [read post]
27 Oct 2011, 6:51 am
” United States v. [read post]
27 Oct 2011, 5:00 am
In Sanchez v. [read post]
26 Oct 2011, 10:35 am
McArthur, 17 D.L.R. (3d) 760 (CA), paras. 7-8 [2] Heckert v. 5470 Investments Ltd., 2008 BCSC 1298, para. 73. [read post]
26 Oct 2011, 10:35 am
McArthur, 17 D.L.R. (3d) 760 (CA), paras. 7-8 [2] Heckert v. 5470 Investments Ltd., 2008 BCSC 1298, para. 73. [read post]
26 Oct 2011, 5:12 am
United States v. [read post]
26 Oct 2011, 5:09 am
In balancing these two rights, Tugendhat J had in mind the “ultimate balancing test” as referred to by Lord Steyn Re S (A Child) [2005] 1 AC 593 (at para 17) and guidance from Lord Bingham in R v Shayler [2003] 1 AC 247 (at para 26) that interference of the ECHR right must not be stricter than necessary to achieve the state’s legitimate aim. [read post]
25 Oct 2011, 2:08 pm
In balancing these two rights, Tugendhat J had in mind the “ultimate balancing test” as referred to by Lord Steyn Re S (A Child) [2005] 1 AC 593 (at para 17) and guidance from Lord Bingham in R v Shayler [2003] 1 AC 247 (at para 26) that interference of the ECHR right must not be stricter than necessary to achieve the state’s legitimate aim. [read post]
25 Oct 2011, 2:00 pm
(Concepcion, at pp. 1746, 1747; see Kanbar v. [read post]
25 Oct 2011, 6:50 am
The evidence of experience [Merpel says, 'evidence of experience' is the judge's own expression: see para.105. [read post]
25 Oct 2011, 4:31 am
Lord Eassie went on to state at para. 48 of the Court’s judgment: “. . . we for our part do not see any reason why in ordinary, contemporary English usage ‘leave’ in this context should not simply connote a period in which the employee is free from work commitment. [read post]
25 Oct 2011, 4:31 am
Lord Eassie went on to state at para. 48 of the Court’s judgment: “. . . we for our part do not see any reason why in ordinary, contemporary English usage ‘leave’ in this context should not simply connote a period in which the employee is free from work commitment. [read post]
25 Oct 2011, 3:03 am
" Tatar v. [read post]
