Search for: "Rimer "
Results 41 - 60
of 102
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
4 Jul 2011, 7:17 am
In Karaj v Three Rivers DC [2011] EWCA Civ 768, Ward and Rimer LJJ granted permission to appeal on what appears to be the "Shacklady" issue (links to our report), viz whether a failure to follow the proper rules regarding the contracting out of the review process invalidates the (entire) review itself. [read post]
4 Jul 2011, 7:17 am
In Karaj v Three Rivers DC [2011] EWCA Civ 768, Ward and Rimer LJJ granted permission to appeal on what appears to be the "Shacklady" issue (links to our report), viz whether a failure to follow the proper rules regarding the contracting out of the review process invalidates the (entire) review itself. [read post]
15 Jun 2011, 3:27 am
"Lord Justice Rimer and Lord Justice Elias gave consenting judgments. [read post]
24 May 2011, 10:55 pm
AP (Trinidad & Tobago) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2011] EWCA Civ 551 Read Judgment In the ongoing controversy over the deportation of foreign offenders, the Court of Appeal has decided that the Immigration Tribunal had not made a mistake of law in deciding that a foreign citizen who had lived in the UK since the age of 4 and had been convicted and sentenced to 18 months imprisonment for a drugs offence, following a string of other offences,… [read post]
19 May 2011, 2:42 pm
In Rimer LJ’s lead judgment, with which the others agreed:For myself, whilst I would accept and adopt Mr Recorder Thayne Forbes’s observations as to the meaning of ‘the structure … of the dwellinghouse’ as providing for present purposes, as Neuberger LJ put it, a good working definition, I am respectfully unconvinced by his holding that the plaster finish to an internal wall or ceiling is to be regarded as in the nature of a decorative finish rather than as… [read post]
8 May 2011, 7:54 am
Leaving aside the rightness of that decision which we have previously discussed this appeal really turned on the basis of a somewhat throwaway remark made by LJ Rimer near the end of his decision (at para 45) in which he said that in the overwhelming majority of cases the net result will be that the legislation will have achieved its primary objective, that of the due protection of the tenant's deposit. [read post]
8 May 2011, 7:54 am
Leaving aside the rightness of that decision which we have previously discussed this appeal really turned on the basis of a somewhat throwaway remark made by LJ Rimer near the end of his decision (at para 45) in which he said that in the overwhelming majority of cases the net result will be that the legislation will have achieved its primary objective, that of the due protection of the tenant's deposit. [read post]
5 Apr 2011, 1:00 am
This is the second part of a two part post by Aidan O’Neill on the topic of religion and the courts. [read post]
3 Apr 2011, 12:02 pm
Rimer LJ in Lambeth v Johnston was right to describe the opportunity of face to face advocacy as "a potentially invaluable procedural right in all cases". [read post]
3 Apr 2011, 12:02 pm
Rimer LJ in Lambeth v Johnston was right to describe the opportunity of face to face advocacy as "a potentially invaluable procedural right in all cases". [read post]
30 Mar 2011, 7:10 am
Rimer LJ at [43] thought that if the “single meaning rule” did achieve a fair balance in defamation law, that “would appear to be the result of luck rather than judgment”. [read post]
18 Mar 2011, 1:30 am
Hamblen J at first instance concluded that the answers were “yes” and “no” respectively; the Court of Appeal (Richards LJ, with whom Mummery and Rimer LJJ agreed) came to the opposite conclusions. [read post]
14 Mar 2011, 2:38 pm
Rimer LJ found that this was arguable. [read post]
14 Mar 2011, 2:38 pm
Rimer LJ found that this was arguable. [read post]
8 Mar 2011, 12:38 pm
Comment I think Rimer LJ makes a thoughtful and important point here. [read post]
21 Feb 2011, 4:04 am
Next Week in the Courts On 23 February 2011, the Court of Appeal (Master of the Rolls, Hooper and Rimer LJJ) will hear an application for permission to appeal against the decision of Eady J in Mireskandari v Associated Newspapers ([2010] EWHC 967 (QB)) and an appeal against the decision of Sharp J in the same case on 19 February 2011 Incidentally, we understand from Mr Benjamin Pell that the two remaining jury trials listed for this term have settled. [read post]
Richardson v Richardson: Cases in which a Barder event can be successfully argued are extremely rare
8 Feb 2011, 9:18 am
Lord Justice Munby agreed with Lord Justice Thorpe and Lord Justice Rimer (who gave concurring judgments) that the 'vitiating event' was a 'mistake' rather than a Barder event. [read post]
9 Dec 2010, 2:50 am
Refreshingly breaking with the tedious tradition of asking questions so long and convoluted that (i) no ordinary mortal can understand them and (ii) the Court of Justice is tempted to substitute its own questions instead, the judges (Lords Justice Jacob, Hooper and Rimer) posed the following: 1. [read post]
13 Nov 2010, 6:06 am
The above is the majority decision of the Court of Appeal, and the wording quoted is that of Lord Justice Rimer, who gave the leading judgement. [read post]
11 Nov 2010, 4:57 am
Lord Justice Rimer (who gave the leading opinion, Lord Justice Thorpe assenting) gave some (very cold) comfort to tenants by asserting that if they were forced to go to Court to compel a landlord to protect their deposit then they should be able to recover their legal costs. [read post]
