Search for: "F. S. v. J. S." Results 501 - 520 of 8,310
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
18 Feb 2018, 3:40 pm by Giles Peaker
J and L, R (on the application of) v London Borough of Hillingdon (2017) EWHC 3411 (Admin) This is a very interesting judicial review, concerning the interrelation of a council’s housing duties under Part 6 and Part 7 Housing Act 1996 and duties to children under s.17 Children Act 1989. [read post]
24 Jan 2022, 9:42 am by SW
  At the other end of the spectrum, he compared this case to R v SSHD ex parte Simms [2000] 2 AC 115 at 131 E-F where there was an issue of legality, and government was legislating in a manner that was contrary to fundamental human rights. [read post]
5 Aug 2010, 12:40 pm by Meg Martin
KimmelCitation: 2010 WY 110Docket Number: S-10-0028Appeal from the District Court of Teton County, the Honorable Nancy J. [read post]
14 Feb 2024, 12:48 pm by Joseph L. Hyde
App. 506, 512, 500 S.E.2d 112, 116 (1998) (Greene, J., concurring in result, joined by Timmons-Goodson, J.). [read post]
9 Aug 2013, 5:30 am by Ray Dowd
   The Seventh Circuit clarified that it would adopt the Supreme Court’s eBay Inc. v. [read post]
14 Mar 2013, 1:42 pm by Matthew L.M. Fletcher
Cir. 1987) (emphasis added) (rejecting agency’s attempt to submit a litigation affidavit as a post hoc rationalization of the agency’s action); see also, Center for Auto Safety v. [read post]
14 Mar 2013, 1:42 pm by Matthew L.M. Fletcher
Cir. 1987) (emphasis added) (rejecting agency’s attempt to submit a litigation affidavit as a post hoc rationalization of the agency’s action); see also, Center for Auto Safety v. [read post]
6 Sep 2006, 4:08 am
John Martin Co., 753 F.2d 1465, 1467 (9th Cir.1985) (applying California law) ("[J]oinder should not dilute the right to attorneys' fees. [read post]