Search for: "DOES I-X"
Results 4841 - 4860
of 7,403
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
21 Nov 2011, 1:45 am
” Lord Dyson, at [131] felt more able to reconcile the different strands of Strasbourg cases: “I would be less critical of the Strasbourg jurisprudence”. [read post]
20 Nov 2011, 5:30 pm
At the end of the day, this narrow view focuses on the individual rather than on the impact on the overall firm and does not result in true force multiplication. [read post]
20 Nov 2011, 10:41 am
Rather, we might wonder: why does philosophy stand in for Segal as archetypical legal scholarship? [read post]
20 Nov 2011, 5:57 am
She put the x in excess. [read post]
18 Nov 2011, 7:49 pm
So what does this mean as an evidentiary matter? [read post]
18 Nov 2011, 7:13 pm
Thanks for taking the time to read this and hope it breaks your heart as much as it does mine and my loved ones. [read post]
17 Nov 2011, 9:06 am
Does the amount at stake in the particular case matter? [read post]
17 Nov 2011, 12:31 am
No deprivation of liberty The appeal was allowed, P’s care plan at Z house does not involve a deprivation of liberty Lord Justice Munby, giving the leading judgement, reviews some of the key case law on Deprivation of Liberty and provides a useful summary of the underlying principles at para 102: i) The starting point is the “concrete situation”, taking account of a whole range of criteria such as the “type, duration, effects and manner of… [read post]
16 Nov 2011, 6:24 am
These are some of the things I've been tweeting about today: another google rival? [read post]
15 Nov 2011, 6:46 pm
I don't think Argott has answered the question. [read post]
15 Nov 2011, 2:41 pm
Updated x 2 | Today, guardian.co.uk’s Comment is Free (CIF) was “taken over” by the Occupy London movement. [read post]
15 Nov 2011, 9:12 am
I know that suggestion doesn’t work for everybody. [read post]
14 Nov 2011, 6:18 pm
Does your employer help pay for your health insurance? [read post]
14 Nov 2011, 9:19 am
Nor does Kennedy's majority.* Not a promising start. [read post]
14 Nov 2011, 8:38 am
If your corporation is interested in supporting that effort, call X. [read post]
14 Nov 2011, 7:48 am
In re X, LIN 03 232 53847 (AAO Oct. 25, 2004); and 9 FAM 41.59 n. 3.1 (c). [read post]
13 Nov 2011, 10:54 am
" ADDED: I like Deresiewicz's writing style and he has a lot of nice observations, but something's obviously missing — something expressed by the "these kids today" tag I just added. [read post]
12 Nov 2011, 4:50 pm
You won’t change the way it does business. [read post]
11 Nov 2011, 1:51 pm
The algorithm does not require any input with respect to the justice’s own ideology. [read post]
11 Nov 2011, 10:33 am
The OWS movement does not, at this point, show any tendency toward radicalism (or even unapologetic liberalism). [read post]
