Search for: "Lord v. State"
Results 421 - 440
of 4,033
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
23 Apr 2010, 5:15 am
Lord Phillips quoted with approval the following passage from Laws LJ in Thoburn v Sunderland City Council: “We should recognise a hierarchy of Acts of Parliament: as it were ‘ordinary’ statutes and ‘constitutional’ statutes. [read post]
9 May 2011, 2:03 am
There are two appeals in the Privy Council this week to be heard by Lords Phillips, Brown, Mance, Kerr and Dyson. [read post]
20 May 2009, 4:28 pm
R (G) v Southwark [2009] UKHL 26 was the appeal to the House of Lords of this Court of Appeal judgment. [read post]
11 May 2007, 11:27 am
See North Carolina Lawyers Weekly, 20 NCLW 0145 et seq. and Lord v. [read post]
29 Jul 2015, 3:54 am
Lord Hale stated the appellant was clearly entitled to a declaration that the application of the settlement criterion breached her rights under art 14 and A2P1 of the convention. [read post]
5 Apr 2016, 7:05 am
The event will mark the 50th anniversary of the United States Supreme Court decision, Miranda v. [read post]
8 Nov 2017, 10:48 pm
Lord Sumption stated that the English position is clear - the prosecution history is only referred to in exceptional circumstances [Merpel - are those exceptional circumstances clear?]. [read post]
30 May 2011, 11:37 pm
Lord Rodger alone dissented. [read post]
1 Aug 2022, 7:39 am
On 29 June 2022, the Supreme Court unanimously dismissed the appeal in Hastings v Finsbury Orthopaedics Ltd and Anor [2022] UKSC 19. [read post]
24 Nov 2011, 7:51 am
Applying Stack and Oxley v Hiscock [2004] EWCA Civ 546, the judge at first instance accepted this contention, stating that he had to consider what was just and fair between the parties having regard to the whole course of dealing between them. [read post]
19 Nov 2015, 8:00 am
In terms of materiality, he considered the House of Lords’ decision in Livesey (formerly Jenkins) v. [read post]
25 Mar 2014, 1:46 pm
In giving the lead judgement in the Court of Appeal, Lord Justice Moore-Bick, quoted extensively from the judgment of Lord Justice Diplock in Tappenden v Artus (Tappenden v Artus [1964] 2 Q.B. 185). [read post]
25 Jan 2010, 4:51 am
The origin is in a 1971 English divorce case, McKenzie v McKenzie. [read post]
3 Sep 2018, 8:14 am
The York Antwerp Rules state three clear principles, all of which must be met in order for the rule to be applied. [read post]
23 Aug 2008, 11:56 am
He therefore granted the husband permission to appeal.Commentary: As Lord Justice Wilson stated, speciously making themselves bankrupt is "a tactic now not uncommonly employed by some devious husbands intent upon obstructing the claims of their wives following divorce". [read post]
30 Nov 2015, 1:00 pm
Lord Neuberger and Lord Sumption stated it this way: “This principle is worth restating at the outset of any analysis of the penalty rule, because it explains much about the way in which it has developed. [read post]
6 Apr 2010, 1:29 am
Read more: 28 March 2010 post The ECtHR judgment Our case summary of Carson; Reynolds v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (May 2005 – House of Lords, 2003 – Court of Appeal) Media coverage of the Carson judgment in The Guardian and on the BBC website [read post]
24 Mar 2016, 5:00 am
While the Secretary of State’s decision could be judicially reviewable, it would not be appropriate for a national court to substitute its own assessment for the decision of the member states which constituted the committee. [read post]
16 Nov 2015, 1:00 am
The UKSC Appeal The appeal will be heard on 18 and 19 November 2015 by a panel of five comprising Lord Neuberger, Lord Mance, Lord Wilson, Lord Sumption and Lord Carnwath. [read post]
29 Nov 2022, 12:15 am
In Trajkovski Invest AB v. [read post]
