Search for: "Lord v. State"
Results 41 - 60
of 3,587
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
17 Mar 2008, 2:30 am
Regina (Animal Defenders International) v Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport House of Lords “The prohibition on political advertising in broadcast media was necessary in a democratic society and not incompatible with the freedom of expression guaranteed by article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights. [read post]
23 Oct 2008, 8:50 am
Regina (Bancoult) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (No 2) House of Lords “Prerogative orders made by the Queen in Council which prevented the unrestricted return of Chagos Islanders to their homeland were not unlawful. [read post]
13 Aug 2008, 8:33 am
Regina (Baiai and Another) v Secretary of State for the Home Department House of Lords “Speeches July 30, 2008 The statutory scheme requiring the permission of the Secretary of State for the Home Department for marriage by people who were subject to immigration control or were illegal entrants was disproportionate and infringed the right to marry protected by article 12 of the European Convention on Human Rights. [read post]
9 Jul 2008, 4:26 pm
Further to this morning's earlier posts (see immediately below), the IPKat can now say a bit about the approach taken by the House of Lords to the proper test of inventive step in Conor Medsystems Inc v Angiotech Pharmaceuticals Inc. [read post]
27 Jan 2012, 8:58 am
On 30 January, the Supreme Court (Lords Phillips, Brown, Kerr, Dyson and Wilson) will hear the case of PP (Algeria) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (formerly VV (Jordan) and PP (Algeria) v Secretary of State for the Home Department). [read post]
8 Oct 2015, 7:45 am
For those of you interested in which cases were chosen, the list is below: Rylands v Fletcher (1866) LR 3 HL 330Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co [1893] 1 QB 256Salomon v A Salomon & Co [1897] AC 22Donoghue v Stevenson [1932] AC 562 Woolmington v Director of Public Prosecutions [1935] AC 462 Liversidge v Anderson [1942] AC 206 Central London Property Trust Ltd v High Trees House Ltd [1947] KB 130 Associated… [read post]
10 Jul 2017, 2:46 am
Lord Carnwath’s interpretation of the Strasbourg jurisprudence did not support a general view that appellant’s oral evidence is a necessary part of an “effective” appeal in the sense contemplated by De Souza Ribeiro (which was interpreted restrictively in IR v UK [2014] ECHR 340). [read post]
24 Oct 2018, 3:49 am
In a Court of Appeal decision published recently, Icescape v Ice-World ([2018] EWCA Civ 2219), Lord Kitchin, who has been recently elevated to the Supreme Court, applies the principles of Actavis. [read post]
17 Oct 2024, 3:54 am
Bs Thornton pointed out that in 2020, the High Court had ruled (in R (Harrison & Ors) v Secretary of State for Justice [2020] EWHC 2096 (Admin) at [111]) that the failure to provide humanist marriages in England and Wales was discriminatory and the Government could not simply “sit on its hands” and do nothing – to which Lord Ponsonby responded, not unreasonably, that “the previous Government chose not to respond to the Law Commission report, and… [read post]
4 Nov 2019, 4:21 pm
On 4 November 2019 Warby J gave judgment in the case of Lord Sheikh v Associated Newspapers [2019] EWHC 2947 (QB) finding that a MailOnline article made a defamatory allegation against the the claimant, a Conservative Member of the House of Lords. [read post]
15 Jun 2007, 2:09 am
Regina (Al-Skeini and Other) v. [read post]
31 Jul 2009, 1:41 am
There was no rule of construction and no rule of law which stated that a reinsurer must respond to every valid claim under the insurance irrespective of the terms of the reinsurance.The most important aspect to the decision was the way in which the Lords distinguished the present case from the decision of the House of Lords in Vesta v Butcher [1989] AC 852. [read post]
9 Mar 2009, 3:08 pm
Union des Caisses des Maladies, Case C-120/95 Decker v. [read post]
24 May 2007, 5:20 am
” The Lord Chief Justice has stated clearly that “judicial independence cannot exist on its own”, Lord Phillips said. [read post]
1 May 2008, 2:18 am
Regina (BAPIO Action Ltd and Another) v Secretary of State for the Home Department and Another House of Lords “Government guidance to National Health Service employers which had the effect of preventing overseas trainee doctors from being offered postgraduate training places in NHS hospitals was unlawful. [read post]
6 Aug 2015, 5:09 am
In the case of Pham (formerly “B2”), Lord Neuberger PSC, Lady Hale DPSC and Lord Mance, Lord Wilson, Lord Sumption, Lord Reed and Lord Carnwath JJSC unanimously dismissed the suspected terrorist’s appeal. [read post]
23 Oct 2012, 8:55 am
Lord Carnwath finished by praising the judgment in Walton v The Scottish Ministers [2012] UKSC 44, stating that making the 2008 Act work as intended is in all our interests, and that generous rules of standing are important to provide a mechanism for listening to competing interests in national infrastructure projects. [read post]
8 May 2009, 2:47 am
Regina (Lee) v Same; Regina (Wells) v Same House of Lords “Although the Secretary of State for Justice had failed in his public duty to provide such treatment courses for prisoners serving indeterminate sentences for public protection as would enable them to demonstrate to the Parole Board that it was safe to release them, their post-tariff detention [...] [read post]
29 Oct 2018, 5:36 am
” With reference to the Court of Appeal’s judgment in ABC & Ors v Telegraph Media Group Ltd [2018] EWCA Civ 2329, we explain the dangers of politicians seeking to usurp the role of judges and why, contrary to what Lord Hain states, his disclosure was not in the public interest (at least not at this moment in time). [read post]
16 Dec 2008, 10:51 am
Regina v Chargot and Others House of Lords “In criminal proceedings against an employer after an accident ot work, it was sufficient for the prosecution to prove merely a risk of injury arising from a state of affairs at work, without identifying and proving specific breaches of duty by the employer. [read post]
