Search for: "State v. Ore"
Results 521 - 540
of 2,482
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
19 Jul 2017, 2:18 am
The policy which permits media reporting on judicial proceedings depends on (i) the right of the public to be informed about a significant public act of the state, and (ii) the law’s recognition that the way in which the story is presented is a matter of editorial judgment. [read post]
2 Apr 2017, 10:23 pm
Diesel v. [read post]
7 Oct 2008, 8:49 am
Court of Appeal (Civil Division) SL (Zimbabwe) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2008] EWCA Civ 1063 (19 September 2008) US (Nepal) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2008] EWCA Civ 1057 (10 September 2008) LA (Uganda) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2008] EWCA Civ 1055 (10 September 2008) NR (Sri Lanka) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2008] EWCA Civ 1053 (10 September 2008) MQ… [read post]
29 Dec 2008, 6:54 am
State v. [read post]
7 Mar 2012, 3:23 am
On appeal from: [2010] EWCA Civ 898 The appellants are Algerian nationals suspected of terrorist offences whom the Secretary of State proposed to deport to Algeria. [read post]
22 May 2010, 6:48 am
” State v. [read post]
22 Mar 2017, 3:57 am
The Supreme Court unanimously allowed the appeal, stating that ‘in a series of related transactions’ must mean that the transactions are interconnected, but that there was no need for the Law Society to further qualify this with a word such as ‘intrinsic’ which the Court of Appeal had interpreted as being present. [read post]
4 Aug 2015, 2:16 am
In addition, the contract also stated that all proceedings were to be brought in England. [read post]
21 Aug 2010, 12:54 am
" Jeremiah Masoli's black eye in State of Oregon v. [read post]
28 Jun 2011, 9:00 am
In this case, formerly known as Quila and Ors v Secretary of State for the Home Department, the Court of Appeal held that the amendment to the Immigration Rules was disproportionate. [read post]
1 Jun 2008, 6:44 am
" You can access Friday's ruling of the Supreme Court of Oregon in State v. [read post]
17 Jul 2022, 2:42 pm
Aytan & Ors v Moore & Ors (HOUSING – RENT REPAYMENT ORDER) (2022) UKUT 27 (LC) We’re late to this one from January 2022, but it is an important initial decision on benchmarking the proportion of rent that a rent repayment order should be made for. [read post]
30 Jul 2010, 3:30 am
Morley & Ors v. [read post]
8 Mar 2011, 10:17 am
In Yeoman v. [read post]
20 Oct 2008, 9:52 am
High Court (Administrative Court) Rainford, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2008] EWHC 2474 (Admin) (17 October 2008) Times Newspapers Ltd v Secretary of State for the Home Department & Anor [2008] EWHC 2455 (Admin) (17 October 2008) High Court (Chancery Division) Jones & Ors v Firkin-Flood [2008] EWHC 2417 (Ch) (17 October 2008) DCC Holdings (UK) Ltd v HM Revenue… [read post]
9 Dec 2010, 2:13 am
Supreme Court The Child Poverty Action Group v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [2010] UKSC 54 (08 December 2010) Progress Property Company Ltd v Moorgarth Group Ltd [2010] UKSC 55 (08 December 2010) Court of Appeal (Civil Division) A v B & Anor [2010] EWCA Civ 1378 (08 December 2010) Perrins v Holland & Ors [2010] EWCA Civ 1398 (08 December 2010) Tilianu, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for… [read post]
3 Jun 2011, 4:20 am
Handed down yesterday, the latest decision from the Patents County Court (Albert Packaging & Ors v Nampak Cartons & Healthcare [2011] EWPCC 15) deals with the thorny subject of unregistered designs. [read post]
1 Nov 2017, 3:21 am
The Supreme Court stated that the origins of judicial review lie within the common law and it is not a procedure which arises “by virtue of” any statutory source; as such had Parliament intended that judicial review was within the scope of the procedures contemplated by s 120(7), it would be expected that it would have provided for it expressly. [read post]
27 Jul 2011, 3:00 am
Their contracts stated they were under no obligation to attend work, although the employment tribunal found as a fact – in practice – they were expected to attend work and provide services personally. [read post]
24 May 2017, 2:26 am
Similarly, the Court held that in relation to s 7, the principle of daily apportionment would apply except where the contract states otherwise in clear terms. [read post]
