Search for: "Holmes v. Fell"
Results 41 - 60
of 81
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
26 Nov 2013, 3:30 pm
Thus a local authority which resolved to use section 17(6) of the Children Act 1989 in all cases which fell foul of section 185(4) of the Housing Act 1996 would in my judgment be [read post]
26 Nov 2013, 3:30 pm
Thus a local authority which resolved to use section 17(6) of the Children Act 1989 in all cases which fell foul of section 185(4) of the Housing Act 1996 would in my judgment be [read post]
12 Jul 2013, 10:59 am
Pictures, Inc. v. [read post]
17 Jan 2013, 10:14 am
This week in Gunn v. [read post]
27 Aug 2012, 11:13 am
In, Graney v. [read post]
27 Aug 2012, 11:13 am
In, Graney v. [read post]
2 Aug 2012, 9:19 am
” And even as far back as Gibbons v. [read post]
28 Jun 2012, 1:20 pm
Coito v. [read post]
3 Apr 2012, 6:29 am
Co. v. [read post]
18 Jan 2012, 7:07 am
Another authority which supported Mr Holmes appeal was the decision of the Privy Council in Preiss v General Dental Council [2001] UKPC 36 (see our analysis). [read post]
12 Jan 2012, 12:08 pm
Following Buck v. [read post]
12 Jan 2012, 12:08 pm
Following Buck v. [read post]
30 Nov 2011, 1:03 pm
Modaresi v. [read post]
6 Nov 2011, 7:50 am
There was no reason to exclude cases which fell within the ambit of the literal words of Reg 8(2)vi) In the present case, the review officer had rejected the original decision that Mr M was intentionally homeless, but confirmed the decision that Mr M did not have priority need. [read post]
6 Nov 2011, 7:50 am
There was no reason to exclude cases which fell within the ambit of the literal words of Reg 8(2)vi) In the present case, the review officer had rejected the original decision that Mr M was intentionally homeless, but confirmed the decision that Mr M did not have priority need. [read post]
28 May 2011, 10:48 pm
Two cases – Papaconstuntinos v Holmes a Court and Holmes v Fraser – were overturned on appeal. [read post]
10 May 2011, 8:25 am
Younger-Holmes Electrical Contractors, Inc. v. [read post]
29 Apr 2011, 3:43 am
In the latter category, we have Gallop v. [read post]
19 Apr 2011, 1:22 am
As Chief Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes elegantly said in the 1907 a case called Georgia v. [read post]
24 Feb 2011, 3:02 pm
One of them fell by the wayside (Manchester v Mushin), while another has been granted PTA to the Supreme Court, but has been stayed pending the outcome of these cases (Salford v Mullen - the lead case in the Court of Appeal, somewhat bizarrely as Salford weren't even represented there). [read post]
