Search for: "State v. Country" Results 4641 - 4660 of 23,389
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
1 Jun 2011, 12:00 am by Isabel McArdle
CD v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2011] EWHC 1273 (Admin) Read judgment As readers of this blog will know, control orders have often been successfully challenged in the courts on human rights grounds. [read post]
8 Aug 2011, 1:25 am by admin
After brushing up on some case law I came across Zadvydas v. [read post]
1 Jul 2011, 7:23 am
The United States Supreme Court did not disturb the concept of General Jurisdiction in Goodyear Dunlop Tires Operations, S.A. et al. v. [read post]
9 Feb 2011, 5:00 am by zshapiro
Last week the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals answered a number of questions about the act in United States v. [read post]
28 Jul 2010, 7:41 am by Dan Mach
Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) announced a proposed rule to address air emissions that cross state lines and contribute to ozone and particulate matter pollution in the eastern half of the country. [read post]
1 Dec 2009, 6:46 am
United States ex rel. [read post]
4 Jul 2018, 2:23 am by Matrix Legal Support Service
The Court held that the purpose of art 3 of the Reorganisation Directive is to ensure that all assets and liabilities of the institution, regardless of the country in which they are situated, are dealt with in a single process in the home member state. [read post]
23 Jun 2023, 8:41 am by Hayley Tsukayama
A year ago this Saturday, the Supreme Court's Dobbs abortion ruling overturned Roe v. [read post]
12 Nov 2015, 1:11 am by INFORRM
On 27 October 2015 Mr Justice Blue, sitting at first instance in the Supreme Court of South Australia, handed down judgment on liability in the defamation case of Duffy v Google Inc ([2015] SASC 170). [read post]
12 Apr 2013, 11:19 am by LTA-Editor
Yet, while the Supreme Court in Kirtsaeng viewed the doctrine expansively, holding that copyrighted materials purchased in foreign countries could be legally resold in the United States, the ReDigi court held that the nature of digital file transfers renders the files unfit for resale. [read post]