Search for: "Cost v. Cost" Results 4881 - 4900 of 48,974
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
18 Mar 2013, 10:46 am by WIMS
The majority reasons that because Chubb reimbursed Taube-Koret's cleanup expenses and did not directly incur those costs, it does not meet the definition of "any person" under section 107(a). 42 U.S.C. [read post]
18 Jul 2018, 2:18 am by Matrix Legal Support Service
The Court held that the Court of Appeal should have considered the impact of the original capital payment on the wife’s current need to pay rent, and this involved a consideration of three earlier Court of Appeal authorities: Pearce v Pearce [2003] EWCA Civ 1054, North v North [2007] EWCA Civ 760, and Yates v Yates [2012] EWCA Civ 532. [read post]
19 Apr 2017, 4:57 am
He considered the Court of Appeal case of Broadhurst v Tan and came to the conclusion that Part 36 overrides Part 45 such that “the limits on costs in the IPEC, both stage costs and the overall cap, do not apply to an award of costs under [former] rule 36.14(3)(b). [read post]
10 Jan 2012, 1:19 pm by WIMS
Supreme Court (SCOTUS) heard oral arguments in the case of Chantell and Michael Sackett v. [read post]