Search for: "State v Ore"
Results 481 - 500
of 2,686
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
19 Mar 2010, 5:45 am
Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Sarkar v West London Mental Health NHS Trust [2010] EWCA Civ 289 (19 March 2010) Maroudas v Secretary of State for Environment Food & Rural Affairs [2010] EWCA Civ 280 (18 March 2010) Connor v Surrey County Council [2010] EWCA Civ 286 (18 March 2010) William Hare Ltd v Shepherd Construction Ltd [2010] EWCA Civ 283 (18 March 2010) Bloomsbury International Ltd & Ors. v The Sea Fish Industry… [read post]
18 Dec 2011, 9:01 pm
State v. [read post]
28 Aug 2007, 2:34 am
A local blogger, NW Republican, weighs in on the American Federation of Teachers, AFT, AFL-CIO v. [read post]
10 Dec 2014, 2:32 am
On appeal from: [2013] EWCA Civ 1587; [2013] EWHC 3777 (Admin) The Supreme Court had to consider if it should depart from the previous House of Lords judgment in R (James & Ors) v Secretary of State for Justice following the ECtHR ruling in James v UK when considering the joined appeals relating to prisoners sentenced to imprisonment for public protection or life imprisonment. [read post]
22 Jun 2011, 10:28 am
Ramsey v. [read post]
2 Feb 2011, 1:50 am
Supreme Court Global Process Systems Inc & Anor v Berhad [2011] UKSC 5 (1 February 2011) ZH (Tanzania) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2011] UKSC 4 (1 February 2011) Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) Steed v R. [2011] EWCA Crim 75 (01 February 2011) Barclay & Ors v R. [2011] EWCA Crim 32 (01 February 2011) Hereworth v R. [2011] EWCA Crim 74 (01 February 2011) Welsh v R. [2011] EWCA Crim 73 (01… [read post]
6 Jan 2015, 10:44 am
Patten LJ (who gave the lead judgment) stated that where a company makes a claim for losses suffered by it as a result of the conduct of a fraudulent director, it does not matter if the company was the intended primary or secondary victim of the fraud. [read post]
26 Aug 2014, 8:01 am
State of Oregon v. [read post]
26 Aug 2014, 8:01 am
State of Oregon v. [read post]
10 Oct 2023, 6:07 pm
Matter of Town of Copake v. [read post]
18 Nov 2010, 9:59 pm
RT (Zimbabwe) & Ors v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2010] EWCA Civ 1285 (18 November 2010) – Read judgment The Court of Appeal has ruled that asylum seekers cannot be forced to lie about not holding political beliefs when returning to their home country. [read post]
16 Jun 2010, 5:20 am
Supreme Court Secretary of State for the Home Department v AP [2010] UKSC 24 (16 June 2010) MS (Palestinian Territories) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2010] UKSC 25 (16 June 2010) Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) New Look Retailers Ltd v London Fire & Emergency Planning Authority [2010] EWCA Crim 1268 (16 June 2010) Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Lambert & Ors v Barratt Homes Ltd & Anor [2010] EWCA Civ… [read post]
17 Mar 2010, 4:18 am
Supreme Court JS (Sri Lanka), R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2010] UKSC 15 (17 March 2010) Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Maga v The Trustees of the Birmingham Archdiocese of the Roman Catholic Church [2010] EWCA Civ 256 (16 March 2010) Agricullo Ltd v Yorkshire Housing Ltd [2010] EWCA Civ 229 (16 March 2010) Joseph v Nettleton Road Housing Co-Operative Ltd [2010] EWCA Civ 228 (16 March 2010) FN (Zimbabwe)… [read post]
20 Dec 2011, 3:40 am
Supreme Court Gnango, R. v [2011] UKSC 59 (14 December 2011) Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v Payne & Anor [2011] UKSC 60 (14 December 2011) Edwards v Chesterfield Royal Hospital NHS Foundation Trust [2011] UKSC 58 (14 December 2011) Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Revenue And Customs v Lansdowne Partners Ltd Partnership [2011] EWCA Civ 1578 (20 December 2011) Ablyazov & Ors v JSC BTA Bank [2011] EWCA Civ 1588 (20… [read post]
14 Apr 2015, 1:05 am
(v) Where it is established that the defendant’s activities constitute a nuisance, the prima facie position is that an injunction should be granted and the legal burden is on the defendant to show why it should not. [read post]
28 May 2010, 2:25 am
In Justin Mayhew v (1) Philip King (2) Milbank Trucks Ltd (Defendants) & Chaucer Insurance plc (Third Party and Part 20 Claimant) v Towergate Stafford Knight Company Limited & Ors Sir Edward Evans-Lombe held that a term of a settlement agreement which stated that a right to an indemnity would cease if the party with the benefit of the indemnity went into administration was contrary to the anti-deprivation principle and would be struck out.The claimant,… [read post]
28 May 2010, 2:25 am
In Justin Mayhew v (1) Philip King (2) Milbank Trucks Ltd (Defendants) & Chaucer Insurance plc (Third Party and Part 20 Claimant) v Towergate Stafford Knight Company Limited & Ors Sir Edward Evans-Lombe held that a term of a settlement agreement which stated that a right to an indemnity would cease if the party with the benefit of the indemnity went into administration was contrary to the anti-deprivation principle and would be struck out.The claimant,… [read post]
2 Jul 2019, 9:27 am
Introduction In these joined appeals, the Supreme Court considered whether the “revised benefit cap” – the effect of which is to restrict the maximum amount of benefits payable to couples and lone parents to £23000 in London and £20000 elsewhere – discriminated against the lone parents of young children, and against the children themselves. [read post]
3 Jul 2019, 2:23 am
On appeal from: [2018] EWCA Civ 844 This appeal considered whether a condition restricting the use of the premises should be implied into a planning permission granted by the appellant; alternatively, whether the planning permission should be interpreted as containing such a condition. [read post]
24 Jan 2017, 1:47 am
On appeal from: [2016] EWHC 2768 (Admin) and [2016] NIQB 85. [read post]
