Search for: "Reed v. Secretary of State"
Results 41 - 60
of 285
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
1 Dec 2014, 8:19 am
The lead judgment was given by Lady Hale, with Lord Neuberger, Lord Mance, Lord Clarke and Lord Reed unanimously agreeing with her findings. [read post]
30 Apr 2012, 4:25 am
Secretary of State for the Home Department v Munir and anor, heard 24 – 27 April 2012. [read post]
8 Dec 2016, 1:30 am
Eadie QC: yes. 15.20 Eadie QC submits that Parliament set up a legislative scheme under the 1972 Act by way that actions by the UK Government and those of other member states flow back to affect member states. [read post]
Case Comment: Hesham Ali (Iraq) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2016] UKSC 60 Part One
13 Mar 2017, 2:42 am
They also held that on a statutory construction of the provisions of the Borders Act 2007 there was no difficulty with a situation where the statute required the Secretary of State to make a deportation order even though it could not be executed because to do so would be a breach of ECHR rights. [read post]
3 Feb 2020, 11:00 pm
In Ray v. [read post]
28 Apr 2010, 5:04 pm
Reed [Sam Reed, Washington State's Secretary of State]. [read post]
16 Dec 2020, 1:45 am
Lord Hodge and Lord Sales gave the main judgment with which Lord Reed, Lady Black and Lord Leggatt agreed. [read post]
29 Dec 2017, 7:59 am
Applying in Bah v UK (2012) 54 EHRR 21 he held that the discrimination was justified on the facts of HC’s case. [read post]
29 Jul 2019, 1:00 am
Patel v Secretary of State for the Home Department; Secretary of State for the Home Department v Shah, heard 7 May 2019. [read post]
1 Jun 2018, 12:43 am
The structure of s 117B(6) is straightforward because it unambiguously states that there is no public interest in removal where a person has a genuine and subsisting parental relationship with a qualifying child and it would not be reasonable to expect the child to leave the UK. [read post]
28 Feb 2012, 6:16 am
PP v Secretary of State for the Home Department, (formerly VV [Jordan]), PP v SSHD, W & BB v SSHD and Z, G, U & Y v SSHD, heard 30 – 31 January 2012. [read post]
4 Feb 2024, 5:57 pm
Reed then explicitly rejects the Lederman view, in a discussion which concludes: The United States is a constitutional democracy. [read post]
6 Jul 2012, 11:33 am
R(on the application of S and KF) v Secretary of State for Justice [2012] EWHC 1810 (Admin)- read judgment This case about prisoner’s pay provides an interesting up to date analysis of the role of the doctrine of “margin of appreciation” and its applicability in domestic courts. [read post]
31 Oct 2012, 4:39 am
Lord Reed gives a concurring judgment. [read post]
18 Nov 2013, 2:47 am
Wider Implications The proceedings in Hook v British Airways and Stott v Thomas Cook have already attracted significant attention from the Equality and Human Rights Commission; with the Secretary of State acting as a further intervener. [read post]
6 Jun 2010, 5:40 pm
” This week in Article 32 investigations: On Friday, an Article 32 investigation hearing will be held at Walter Reed Army Medical Center in the case of United States v. [read post]
24 Oct 2017, 6:52 am
As part of the appellant’s application to work as a teacher, the Secretary of State for the Home Department (‘SSHD’) issued an ECRC. [read post]
9 Nov 2018, 7:34 am
The Supreme Court Generally speaking, Lord Carnwath – with whom Lords Kerr, Wilson, Reed and Briggs concurred – held that Part 5A deliberately establishes an uncomplicated set of rules. [read post]
13 Feb 2012, 2:15 am
PP v Secretary of State for the Home Department, (formerly VV [Jordan]), PP v SSHD, W & BB v SSHD and Z, G, U & Y v SSHD, heard 30 – 31 January 2012. [read post]
29 Dec 2017, 8:16 am
Despite some evidence relating to some conventions, there was insufficient evidence to demonstrate a widespread and consistent state practice. [read post]
