Search for: "Bates v. AT"
Results 541 - 560
of 980
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
22 May 2012, 8:55 am
Bates, 315 S.W.3d 77, 85 (Tex. [read post]
22 May 2012, 8:03 am
CASE OF SCOPPOLA v. [read post]
21 May 2012, 4:54 am
Last week’s resolved cases include: Mr John Donovan v Metro, Clause 1, 21/05/2012; Lesley Archer v The Echo (Southend), Clause 1, 18/05/2012; Ms Nicola Searle v South Wales Echo, Clauses 1, 3, 17/05/2012; Mr Liam Fairlie v North Devon Journal, Clause 1, 17/05/2012; Mr Ronald Baird v Northampton Chronicle & Echo, Clause 1, 17/05/2012; Mr Ronald Baird v The Sun, Clause 1, 17/05/2012; Mr Ronald Baird v Daily Mirror, Clause 1,… [read post]
20 May 2012, 1:10 pm
A guilty plea which is ‘the tainted product of ignorance’ is also void," see, North Carolina v. [read post]
18 May 2012, 9:43 am
Ct.), with introductory note by Elizabeth Stubbins Bates Garcia v. [read post]
16 May 2012, 1:05 pm
The Dallas Court of Appeals bought mother's simplistic argument: If you live in the same place you did ten years ago, there could be no material or substantial change of circumstances no matter where else you lived, or what else happened, in the meantime.The Dallas court cited to, but did not follow, the analysis in, Bates v. [read post]
15 May 2012, 9:28 am
The case is Scoppola v. [read post]
14 May 2012, 10:50 am
Dean Spielmann, Judge of the European Court of Human Rights and President of Section V of the Court will deliver the keynote address on 8 June 2012. [read post]
14 May 2012, 4:33 am
Resolved cases include: Mr Stephen Wren v Daily Mail (Clause 1), 11/05/2012; A man v The Sun (Clause 1), 11/05/2012; Worcestershire Acute Hospitals NHS Trust v Daily Mail, Clause 1, 11/05/2012; Ms Louise Pyne v Daily Mail, Clause 1, 08/05/2012. [read post]
11 May 2012, 2:19 am
It isn’t just friendly, inoffensive speech that is protected: Sedley LJ’s statement (in Redmond-Bates v DPP (1999) 163 JP 789 that “freedom only to speak inoffensively is not worth having” was cited amongst others to this effect. [read post]
8 May 2012, 6:46 pm
History chose Bates v. [read post]
7 May 2012, 4:18 am
Mr Jem Aldridge v The Hunts Post (Clause 1), 03/05/2012; Mr Carl Waring v Daily Mail (Clause 1), 03/05/2012; A woman v The Argus (Brighton) 03/05/2012; Mr Mark Gunter v Guernsey Press & Star (Clause 1), 03/05/2012; Mr Leonard Kernott v Daily Mail (Clause 3), 03/05/2012; Mr Peter Reynolds v Northamptonshire Evening Telegraph (Clause 1), 01/05/2012; A woman v East Riding Mail (Clauses 3, 9), 30/04/2012. [read post]
7 May 2012, 1:47 am
It isn’t just friendly, inoffensive speech that is protected: Sedley LJ’s statement (in Redmond-Bates v DPP (1999) 163 JP 789 that “freedom only to speak inoffensively is not worth having” was cited amongst others to this effect. [read post]
4 May 2012, 11:46 am
JONES v. [read post]
30 Apr 2012, 1:30 am
Coomber heard 9 and 16 November 2011 (HHJ Moloney QC) El-Naschie v Macmillan, heard 11, 14, 16 to 18, 21, 22, 25, 28-30 November, 1 -2 December 2011 (Sharp J) Woodrow v Johansson, heard 19 January 2012 (HHJ Parkes QC) Chambers v DPP, heard 8 February 2012 (Gross LJ and Irwin J) Qema v NGN Ltd heard 29 February and 1 March 2012 (Sharp J) Hunt v Times Newspapers, heard 9 and 12 March 2012 (Eady J) Bento v Chief Constable of Bedfordshire, heard 3… [read post]
28 Apr 2012, 4:26 am
It has already led to a 2009 libel action in which Sir Charles Gray awarded Mr Levi £50,000 damages against Mr Bates (Levi v Bates ([2009] EWHC 1495 (QB)). [read post]
22 Apr 2012, 2:17 pm
For the UKHRB’s perspective on this, see Dr Ed Bates’ recent post. [read post]
18 Apr 2012, 4:30 am
Stein v. [read post]
17 Apr 2012, 12:19 am
Austin v UK and Von Hannover v Germany (No 2) It is in this context that the cases of Austin v UK and Von Hannover (No 2) are considered, in order to argue that certain of the proposals currently being put forward are echoed in dominant themes within the judgments. [read post]
12 Apr 2012, 6:00 am
Klonsky v. [read post]
