Search for: "Grant v. Royal"
Results 41 - 60
of 1,034
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
26 May 2023, 1:00 pm
In Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea v Bafna-Louis, 2023 WL 2387385 (S.D.N.Y., 2023) the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea (the “RBKC”) brought a petition for the return of CBL and Baby L to the United Kingdom pursuant to the Hague Convention. [read post]
26 May 2023, 5:50 am
The Judge granted the application.. [read post]
23 May 2023, 12:58 am
MGN has agreed to pay “a significant sum” in damages to royal commentator Lady Colin Campbell over an article that claimed she went on TV to defend Jeffrey Epstein’s “right to rape children”. [read post]
10 May 2023, 2:30 pm
From Collins v. [read post]
10 May 2023, 12:50 pm
Waters files an anti-SLAPP motion, which the trial court grants. [read post]
10 May 2023, 4:00 am
Far worse, I saw that much of what journalists take for granted about law is simply wrong. [read post]
3 May 2023, 6:34 am
The Public Order Act 2023 was granted Royal Assent on 2 May 2023 and some parts will become effective on 3 May 2023. [read post]
2 May 2023, 12:30 am
Hodge Ch. was satisfied that the petitioners had shown a sufficient justification for the works and he granted a faculty. [read post]
1 May 2023, 7:46 am
On 25 to 27 April 2023 there was a hearing in the case of Grant v NGN and Duke of Sussex NGN before Fancourt J. [read post]
30 Apr 2023, 12:37 am
In Mr J Mitchell v Royal Mail Group Ltd (England and Wales: Religion or Belief Discrimination) [2023] UKET 1805473/2022, Royal Mail Group applied to strike out the claim that Mr Mitchell’s dismissal had amounted to direct discrimination or harassment related to religion or belief. [read post]
17 Apr 2023, 2:19 am
The following Supreme Court judgments remain outstanding: (As of 07/04/23) East of England Ambulance Service NHS Trust v Flowers and Ors, heard 22 June 2021 Canada Square Operations Ltd v Potter, heard 14th June 2022 Unger and another (in substitution for Hasan) v Ul-Hasan (deceased) and another, heard 20th October 2022 Chief Constable of the Police Service of Northern Ireland and another v Agnew and others (Northern Ireland), heard… [read post]
14 Apr 2023, 4:41 pm
” Take care with that social media duty of care October 2018: “[Rhodes v OPO] aptly illustrates the caution that has to be exercised in applying physical world concepts of harm, injury and safety to communication and speech, even before considering the further step of imposing a duty of care on a platform to take steps to reduce the risk of their occurrence as between third parties, or the yet further step of appointing a regulator to superintend the platform’s… [read post]
12 Apr 2023, 7:35 am
” Take care with that social media duty of care October 2018: “[Rhodes v OPO] aptly illustrates the caution that has to be exercised in applying physical world concepts of harm, injury and safety to communication and speech, even before considering the further step of imposing a duty of care on a platform to take steps to reduce the risk of their occurrence as between third parties, or the yet further step of appointing a regulator to superintend the platform’s… [read post]
3 Apr 2023, 4:00 am
Now, one real-life royal has been thrown into the fray. [read post]
19 Mar 2023, 9:01 pm
It follows the May 2021 ruling of the District Court of The Hague in Milieudefensie et al. v. [read post]
13 Mar 2023, 6:10 am
For example, nationals of countries designated by the Attorney General can be granted “temporary protected status” (TPS) under 8 C.F.R. [read post]
27 Feb 2023, 2:17 am
(b) Does the 1977 Act provide for the grant of a patent without a named human inventor? [read post]
13 Feb 2023, 9:59 am
Funk v. [read post]
2 Feb 2023, 1:03 pm
More recently again, in TF v DL v E&P [2022] EWFC 139, District Judge Webb dealt with a case involving a father diagnosed with a delusional disorder and a long history of vexatious applications and abusive correspondence against a backdrop of his belief the courts were corrupt. [read post]
2 Feb 2023, 6:30 am
As Michael McConnell has explained, Wilson was also primarily responsible, along with Rutledge, for dividing the royal prerogatives between Congress and the President, hence for the specific enumeration of executive powers in Article II. [read post]
