Search for: "High v State" Results 4341 - 4360 of 35,497
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
10 Jul 2020, 10:03 am by Nick Armstrong
An increasing number of cases, including most recently ZN (Afghanistan) v SSHD [2018] 3 Costs LO 357, recognise this reality. [read post]
30 Jul 2008, 1:04 pm
Van Colle (administrator of the estate of GC (deceased)) and another (Original-Respondents and Cross-appellants) v Chief Constable of the Hertfordshire Police (Original Appellant and Cross-respondent) Smith (Respondent) v Chief Constable of Sussex Police (Appellant) [2008] UKHL 50 (30 July 2008) Caldarelli (Appellant) v Court of Naples (Respondent) (Criminal Appeal from her Majesty's High Court of Justice) [2008] UKHL 51 (30 July 2008) R (on the application… [read post]
6 May 2014, 2:05 pm by Christopher Lund
The Supreme Court yesterday decided Town of Greece v. [read post]
20 Jun 2011, 2:50 pm
That was more than evident recently in a Washington Court of Appeals ruling.In a rather unusual move, Judge Anne Ellington, writing a concurring opinion in State of Washington v. [read post]
13 Mar 2008, 2:09 am
(On the Applications of) v Secretary of State for Justice [2008] EWCA Civ 177 (12 March 2008) RHJ Ltd v FT Patten (Holdings) Ltd & Anor [2008] EWCA Civ 151 (12 March 2008) Secretary of State for Justice v Rayner [2008] EWCA Civ 176 (12 March 2008) High Court (Chancery Division) Calvert v William Hill Credit Ltd [2008] EWHC 454 (Ch) (12 March 2008) Source: www.bailii.org [read post]
28 Jul 2011, 3:35 am by tracey
Supreme Court Autoclenz Ltd v Belcher & Ors [2011] UKSC 41 (27 July 2011) Belmont Park Investments PTY Ltd v BNY Corporate Trustee Services Ltd & Anor [2011] UKSC 38 (27 July 2011) Jivraj v Hashwani [2011] UKSC 40 (27 July 2011) Houldsworth & Anor v Bridge Trustees Ltd & Anor [2011] UKSC 42 (27 July 2011) Lucasfilm Ltd & Ors v Ainsworth & Anor [2011] UKSC 39 (27 July 2011) Court of Appeal (Civil Division) The Newspaper Licensing… [read post]
26 May 2014, 9:05 am by Walter Olson
Many of his positions on church-state matters would normally be taken for quite liberal; for example, he argued the recent Supreme Court case of Town of Greece v. [read post]
18 Jan 2011, 7:29 am by INFORRM
  MGN challenged the decision in Campbell v MGN (No.2) ([2005] 1 WLR 3394) on Article 10 grounds. [read post]
31 May 2012, 3:36 am by Laura Anil (laura.anil@olswang.com)
The High Court Decision The High Court held that M-Tech’s defences had no real prospect of success and awarded summary judgment against M-Tech. [read post]
28 Mar 2018, 3:48 am by Edith Roberts
Wayfair, in which the justices will reconsider a ruling that limits the ability of state and local governments to tax out-of-state online retailers, “the high court may be poised to overrule the 26-year-old precedent. [read post]
11 Dec 2017, 11:10 am by Amy Howe
The centers are represented by lawyers for the Alliance Defending Freedom, which also played key roles in (among others) two recent high-profile cases: Masterpiece Cakeshop v. [read post]
12 Jul 2011, 2:59 am
L’Oréal has identified various forms of infringement, including, inter alia, the sale and offer for sale, to consumers in the EU, of goods bearing L’Oréal’s trade marks intended, by L’Oréal, for sale in third States (parallel importation).The High Court (United Kingdom), before which the dispute is pending, has asked the Court of Justice a number of questions concerning the obligations to which a company operating an internet marketplace… [read post]
26 Jul 2012, 5:50 am by sally
Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Woolley & Anor v Ultimate Products Ltd & Anor [2012] EWCA Civ 1038 (26 July 2012) Westcoast (Holdings) Ltd v Wharf Land Subsidiary (No 1) Ltd & Anor [2012] EWCA Civ 1003 (26 July 2012) Peaktone Ltd v Joddrell [2012] EWCA Civ 1035 (26 July 2012) NHS Leeds v Larner [2012] EWCA Civ 1034 (25 July 2012) YZ (China), R (On the Application Of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2012] EWCA Civ 1022… [read post]
26 Nov 2010, 4:45 am by Rosalind English
In asylum cases the claimant has to show that a real risk of treatment that crosses the high threshold of Article 3. [read post]