Search for: "Young v. Young" Results 4941 - 4960 of 12,746
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
8 Jun 2019, 1:22 am by INFORRM
To achieve the minimum necessary restriction on publicity, the court decided to make an order under section 39 of the Children and Young Persons Act 1933, prohibiting identification by name of the minor beneficiaries, but not of any of the other parties or the trust itself. [read post]
30 Nov 2012, 3:14 am by Susan Brenner
  Some of the sites appeared to involve young Asian girls having sex with older men. [read post]
28 Mar 2018, 4:07 pm by INFORRM
Indeed, not dissimilar to Lord Mance’s emphasis on the Claimant’s family life in the Supreme Court case of PJS v News Group Newspapers Ltd in the context of privacy claims, the judgment in AXB v BXA serves to illustrate that the Court will continue to place great emphasis when the Claimant’s family members, in particular spouses and young children, are also plainly adversely affected by both the Defendant’s course of conduct and the publicity that… [read post]
26 Aug 2013, 12:15 pm by Stephen Bilkis
In the People v Keindl this was issue along the alleged prejudice of the jury with the testimony of expert witness. [read post]
20 Mar 2012, 12:00 am by INFORRM
He said that it was this which “pins the guilt onto the Claimant’s chest”, and described the match-fixing as a “diabolical scheme” which took advantage of the young players who were “like children in an orphans’ home”. [read post]