Search for: "Lord v. State"
Results 441 - 460
of 3,587
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
30 Sep 2018, 7:23 am
State of Kerala, (India Sup. [read post]
20 May 2022, 1:30 am
Stage 1: Entitled Expectation Lord Tyre considered the leading authorities on the issue of “defect” under the CPA, namely Wilkes v DePuy International Limited [2016] EWHC 3096 (QB) and Gee and Ors v DePuy International Limited [2018] EWHC 1208 (QB). [read post]
22 Aug 2016, 6:51 am
Lord Mance reiterated that there is no duty of care owed between litigants and Lord Reed urged caution against “the interpretation of law reports from the 16th to the 18th centuries”, stating that “the court must not lose sight of the fact that it is deciding the law for the 21st century. [read post]
12 Dec 2017, 5:00 am
On Dec. 11, the United States District Court for the District of Columbia heard arguments in ACLU v. [read post]
2 Dec 2011, 4:02 am
Current state of the law The House of Lords decision in Lawson v Serco Ltd [2006] ICR 250 is the leading case in this area. [read post]
30 Dec 2013, 6:46 am
State v. [read post]
1 Mar 2016, 7:00 am
In a previous post, we considered the factual background to the appeals before the Supreme Court this week in the cases of R (MA) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, R (A), and R (Rutherford). [read post]
26 Jun 2015, 12:30 am
In the admirably brief Court of Appeal decision just out - Actavis UK Ltd & Others v Eli Lilly & Company [2015] EWCA Civ 555 (25 June 2015) , Lord Justice Floyd (Lord Justice Kitchin and Lord Justice Longmore concurring) disagreed with Arnold J on two main issues - one on which nothing turns in the end (although it has important wider significance), and one which has the result that this case seems set to run and run.The claimBut let's recap a… [read post]
31 Jan 2022, 9:59 am
” As noted by Lord Leggatt, English courts have traditionally applied the “same interest” test rigorously, particularly in light of the Court of Appeal’s key ruling in Markt & Co v Knight Steamship [1910] 2 KB 1021. [read post]
3 Aug 2008, 11:18 am
R (on the application of M) (FC) (Respondent) v Slough Borough Council [2008] UKHL 52 is a House of Lords case concerning Local Authority obligations under the National Assistance Act 1948, and specifically when the authority is obliged to arrange and pay for accommodation. [read post]
18 Aug 2015, 5:00 am
Heather Capital - Lord Woolman’s opinion: Heather Capital Ltd (In Liquidation) v Levy & McRae and othersOUTER HOUSE, COURT OF SESSION[2015] CSOH 115 CA207/14NOTE BY LORD WOOLMANIn the causeHEATHER CAPITAL LIMITED (IN LIQUIDATION) Pursuers; againstLEVY & McRAE AND OTHERS Defenders:Pursuer: Lord Davidson of Glen Clova QC; Shepherd & Wedderburn LLPDefenders: Clark QC, J Brown; Simpson & Marwick14 August… [read post]
6 Nov 2008, 1:08 pm
Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Tariquez-Zaman v London Deanery of Post Graduate Medical and Dental Education [2008] EWCA Civ 1226 (06 November 2008) PS (Sri Lanka) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2008] EWCA Civ 1213 (06 November 2008) SK (Zimbabwe) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2008] EWCA Civ 1204 (06 November 2008) Blackburn & Anor v West Midlands Police [2008] EWCA Civ 1208 (06 November 2008) RA (Sri… [read post]
15 Mar 2015, 9:18 am
” Lord Sumption distinguished the facts of Mr Catt’s appeal from those in MM v United Kingdom, and the decision of the Supreme Court in R (T) v Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police, in that: “[t]here has been no disclosure to third parties, and the prospect of future disclosure is limited by comprehensive restrictions. [read post]
24 Nov 2023, 7:38 am
In this post, Pippa Borton, Associate at CMS, previews the decision awaited from the Supreme Court in Kireeva v Bedzhamov. [read post]
18 Sep 2019, 1:18 am
1538: Aidan O’Neill QC submits that the role of this court is to rebalance the constitution. 1530: Aidan O’Neill QC refers to the decision in Padfield v Minister of Agriculture at page 1061 of the decision. [read post]
26 Jun 2021, 2:59 am
This is one of the issues in the case Facebook v Voxer [2021] EWHC 1377 (Pat). [read post]
5 May 2021, 9:07 am
In Gulati v. [read post]
13 Jun 2006, 8:06 am
United States, 92 U.S. 105 (1876); Tenet v. [read post]
28 Nov 2013, 6:27 am
Lord Sumption stated that this could not be the correct result stating: “The essential element in my view is not control of the environment in which the claimant is injured, but control over the claimant for the purpose of performing a function for which the defendant has assumed responsibility. [read post]
28 Nov 2013, 6:27 am
Lord Sumption stated that this could not be the correct result stating: “The essential element in my view is not control of the environment in which the claimant is injured, but control over the claimant for the purpose of performing a function for which the defendant has assumed responsibility. [read post]
