Search for: "State v. Borough"
Results 561 - 580
of 1,316
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
2 Feb 2020, 2:44 pm
Al Ahmed v London Borough of Tower Hamlets (2020) EWCA Civ 51 We saw the High Court in this case take an incredibly strict approach to homelessness section 204 appeal timescales (our report), deciding that seeking legal aid representation could not be a good reason for filing an appeal out of time because, well, the substance of any appeal should be obvious to an unrepresented homeless applicant. [read post]
2 Feb 2020, 2:44 pm
Al Ahmed v London Borough of Tower Hamlets (2020) EWCA Civ 51 We saw the High Court in this case take an incredibly strict approach to homelessness section 204 appeal timescales (our report), deciding that seeking legal aid representation could not be a good reason for filing an appeal out of time because, well, the substance of any appeal should be obvious to an unrepresented homeless applicant. [read post]
27 Jan 2011, 4:00 pm
(Eugene Volokh) The case, Yemshaw v. [read post]
23 Mar 2007, 1:39 am
" State v. [read post]
1 Dec 2011, 1:12 pm
New York State Urban Dev. [read post]
2 Jul 2014, 3:04 pm
See State v. [read post]
23 Apr 2012, 7:57 am
Pitman v. [read post]
27 May 2019, 1:00 am
London Borough of Lambeth v Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government & Ors, heard 21 May 2019. [read post]
29 Aug 2009, 12:53 am
Ms Webb was (and, as far as I know, still is) the secure tenant of the London Borough of Wandsworth. [read post]
3 Feb 2013, 3:57 pm
Ibrahim v London Borough of Wandsworth [2013] EWCA Civ 20The question for the Court of Appeal in this second appeal from a homeless appeal, was “How should the courts deal with a plainly deficient homelessness decision when the deficiency has had no adverse consequences for the applicant? [read post]
3 Feb 2013, 3:57 pm
Ibrahim v London Borough of Wandsworth [2013] EWCA Civ 20The question for the Court of Appeal in this second appeal from a homeless appeal, was “How should the courts deal with a plainly deficient homelessness decision when the deficiency has had no adverse consequences for the applicant? [read post]
17 Sep 2011, 12:01 am
In Borough of Duryea v. [read post]
1 Mar 2010, 3:15 am
High Court (Queen’s Bench) Veolia Water Central Ltd v London Fire & Emergency Planning Authority [2010] EWHC 208 (QB) (09 February 2010) Moore v Hotelplan Ltd (t/a Inghams Travel) & Anor [2010] EWHC 276 (QB) (22 February 2010) Rutherford v Seymour Pierce Ltd [2010] EWHC 375 (QB) (11 February 2010) Law Society of England and Wales v Secretary of State for Justice & Anor [2010] EWHC 352 (QB) (26 February 2010) High Court (Chancery… [read post]
15 Apr 2008, 1:25 am
Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) Kowalski, R. v [2008] EWCA Crim 700 (19 March 2008) High Court (Queen’s Bench Division) Reynolds v Stone Rowe Brewer (a firm) [2008] EWHC 497 (QB) (18 March 2008) Geniki Investments International Ltd. v Ellis Stockbrokers Ltd [2008] EWHC 549 (QB) (19 March 2008) Al-Rawas v Pegasus Energy Ltd & Ors [2008] EWHC 617 (QB) (08 April 2008) High Court (Chancery Division) Wells v Pilling Parish Council [2008]… [read post]
2 Aug 2015, 12:37 pm
Poshteh v Royal Borough of Kensington And Chelsea [2015] EWCA Civ 711 At issue in this second appeal from a s.204 appeal was whether it was reasonable for Ms Poshteh to have refused an offer of accommodation. [read post]
7 Feb 2015, 1:00 am
R (Rotherham Borough Council & Ors) v Secretary of State for Business, heard 20 October 2014. [read post]
26 Jun 2008, 9:15 am
"
State v. [read post]
24 Oct 2022, 10:35 am
This state of affairs is problematic for two reasons. [read post]
22 Oct 2017, 4:18 pm
Panayiotou v London Borough of Waltham Forest (2017) EWCA Civ 1624 This is an important court of appeal decision on the meaning of ‘significantly’ in Lord Neuberger’s definition of vulnerability under s.189(1)(c) Housing Act 1996 in Hotak v Southwark LBC (2015) UKSC 30, [2016] AC 811 (our report). [read post]
23 Oct 2018, 8:56 am
(Jurisdiction)State v. [read post]
