Search for: "Human v. State"
Results 4821 - 4840
of 19,141
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
7 Jul 2020, 4:49 pm
” The Court relied on Perinçek v. [read post]
15 May 2012, 7:48 am
On 25 April 2012 the Supreme Court handed down two major judgments on age discrimination: Homer v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police [2012] UKSC 15 and Seldon v Clarkson Wright and Jakes [2012] UKSC 16. [read post]
17 Apr 2021, 11:11 am
Toro v. [read post]
10 Jul 2010, 12:00 am
STATE v. [read post]
20 Jun 2020, 3:30 pm
The recent United States Supreme Court case, Bostock v. [read post]
21 Apr 2022, 9:01 pm
To see why, it helps to begin with what has been the most important administrative law case for nearly four decades.In Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. [read post]
5 Jul 2016, 4:03 pm
Slovakia and Dupuis v. [read post]
21 Jan 2007, 4:16 pm
State v. [read post]
9 Jul 2012, 12:00 am
In In O’Halloran v United Kingdom (2008) 46 EHRR 21 the European Court of Human Rights held that a provision of the Road Traffic Act 1988, which required vehicle owners to identify the driver, did not involve an infringement of Article 6, even if the identification led to a prosecution. [read post]
22 Dec 2009, 12:58 pm
Elaine Photography, LLC v. [read post]
15 Sep 2010, 10:40 am
In 1984, the California Supreme Court ruled unequivocally in Hartzell v. [read post]
7 Jun 2013, 11:37 am
Perry, the challenge to California’s Proposition 8, and United States v. [read post]
11 May 2018, 11:46 am
Reynolds (Indian Civil Rights Act; Tribal Officials) State Courts Bulletinhttp://www.narf.org/nill/bulletins/state/2018.htmlHarjo v. [read post]
7 May 2015, 3:16 pm
Our observation in United States v. [read post]
6 Jan 2016, 5:58 am
Next week’s oral arguments in Friedrichs v. [read post]
18 Apr 2011, 6:26 am
On Friday, the federal government filed a petition for certiorari in United States v. [read post]
29 Nov 2009, 6:56 pm
Responsibility for care also is a common law duty, as courts since Darling v. [read post]
21 May 2012, 6:42 am
Al-Sirri v Secretary of State for the Home Department, heard 14 – 15 May 2012. [read post]
1 Sep 2020, 12:54 am
The court considered a number of authorities in this regard, including X and Y v The Netherlands (App no 8978/80) and KU v Finland (App no 2872/02), in which the Strasbourg court had indicated that ECHR, art 8 placed a positive obligation on states to put in place effective deterrence measures against activities which may pose a threat to fundamental values and essential aspects of the private lives of individuals, particularly children and other vulnerable persons. [read post]
22 Sep 2021, 6:01 am
In Alabama Association of Realtors v. [read post]
