Search for: "Lord v. Smith"
Results 41 - 60
of 467
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
1 Jul 2011, 6:35 am
In fact, Smith v Oxfordshire involved the same “Smith” as in this particular case. [read post]
20 Oct 2010, 10:56 am
As might be expected at this point, a familiar old chestnut from Catnic Components v Hill & Smith [1982] RPC 183 was wheeled out, by reference to the more recent case of Virgin Atlantic Airways Ltd v Premium Aircraft Interiors UK Ltd [2009] EWCA Civ 1062. [read post]
8 Jul 2019, 4:48 pm
Mylius was convicted after a one-day trial before the Lord Chief Justice, Lord Alverstone, and a special jury at the High Court. [read post]
24 May 2010, 1:12 am
As such, Smith J awarded only nominal damages plus costs. [read post]
24 May 2010, 1:12 am
As such, Smith J awarded only nominal damages plus costs. [read post]
30 Jun 2010, 2:41 am
R (Smith) v Secretary of State for Defence & Anor [2010] UKSC 29 – Read judgment The Supreme Court has ruled by a 6-3 majority that the Human Rights Act does not apply on the battlefield and soldiers are not automatically entitled to inquests arising from deaths in foreign conflicts. [read post]
12 Aug 2011, 8:58 am
The case of Firthglow Ltd (t/a) Protectacoat) v Szilagyi [2009] EWCA Civ 98 is also relied upon by Lord Clarke- in particular the finding of Smith LJ that, “The court has to consider whether or not the words of the written contract represent the true intentions or expectations of the parties. [read post]
2 Dec 2011, 4:02 am
Current state of the law The House of Lords decision in Lawson v Serco Ltd [2006] ICR 250 is the leading case in this area. [read post]
1 Jul 2010, 4:03 am
This is a postscript to Adam Wagner’s post this morning on the UKSC decision in R (Smith) v. [read post]
11 Dec 2014, 8:06 am
As suggested in the cases of Eagle v Chambers [2003] EWCA CIV 1107 and Smith v Chief Constable Nottinghamshire Police [2012] EWCA Civ 161, a vehicle is potentially a dangerous weapon and the attribution of causative potency to the driver must be greater than to the pedestrian. [read post]
10 Jun 2023, 4:02 pm
This approach is consistent with the law, with support for example from a 1969 decision Smith Kline.Sir Robin finally remarked that there is no evidence that patents prevent innovation. [read post]
8 Nov 2017, 10:48 pm
Lord Neuberger explained that he had got close to considering this question when considering an application for permission to appeal in Smith & Nephew v Convatech [2012] EWCA Civ 1638, although the case settled before it was decided upon by the Supreme Court. [read post]
Case preview: Greater Glasgow Health Board (Appellant) v Doogan and another (Respondents) (Scotland)
11 Nov 2014, 7:03 am
The House of Lords decision in R v Salford HA Ex p Janaway Lady Smith found support for her interpretation in the case of R v Salford HA Ex p Janaway [1989] 1 AC 537. [read post]
7 Dec 2010, 4:55 pm
Such orders were made in the cases of ASG v GSA, DFT v TFD, AMM v HXW and KJH v HGF. [read post]
3 Jul 2011, 4:12 am
R v Smith, heard 16 June 2011. [read post]
24 Nov 2023, 7:38 am
In this post, Pippa Borton, Associate at CMS, previews the decision awaited from the Supreme Court in Kireeva v Bedzhamov. [read post]
24 Jul 2010, 10:04 am
The defence of fair comment was last considered by the House of Lords in Telnikoff v Matusevitch ([1992] 2 AC 343). [read post]
28 Apr 2013, 7:04 am
” Lord Sumption, albeit with the benefit of later CJEU decisions in FAPL v QC Leisure and Infopaq II that were not available to Proudman J or the Court of Appeal, has made a clear statement that there is no policy reason why mere watching and listening (as opposed to downloading or printing) should be regarded as an infringement in the online world any more than in the offline world. [read post]
22 Jun 2011, 2:04 am
In Zurich Insurance Company PLC v Hayward [2011] EWCA Civ 641 the Court of Appeal held that Zurich was entitled to bring new evidence of fraudulent behaviour by an individual who was injured at work despite the fact that issues as to his good faith had already been raised in a prior action.In 1998 Hayward was injured in the course of his employment with a company called David S Smith Packaging Company (Smith), which had taken out employers' liability insurance with… [read post]
2 Mar 2008, 3:46 am
Four years later, however, the Lords revisited the principles established by Fairchild in the case of Barker v. [read post]
