Search for: "State v. Dyson"
Results 41 - 60
of 273
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
26 Feb 2020, 2:30 am
Following a stay and the decision in EN (Serbia) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2009] EWCA Civ 630, which determined that the 2004 Order was unlawful, DN amended his judicial review proceedings to concentrate on the lawfulness of the detention. [read post]
4 Mar 2024, 1:19 am
On 27 February 2024, judgment on meaning was handed down by Lewis J in the long-running litigation between the Dyson Group companies and the broadcasters Channel 4 and ITN, Dyson Technology Ltd & Anor v Channel Four Television Corporation & Anor [2024] EWHC 400 (KB). [read post]
8 Feb 2024, 4:09 pm
The recent judgment in Dyson v MGN Limited [2023] EWHC 3092, in which the Defendant publisher succeeded in its defence of honest opinion, provides important authority on the interpretation of section 3(4)(a) of the Defamation Act 2013. [read post]
10 Nov 2011, 3:54 am
It is established in Strasbourg and domestic jurisprudence that in certain “well-defined circumstances” art 2 will impose “a positive obligation on [state] authorities to take preventative operational measure” to protect the life of an individual (Osman v UK (2009) 29 EHRR 245 at 115). [read post]
10 Jul 2015, 4:06 pm
The Court of Appeal decision in Google Inc v Vidal-Hall [2015] EWCA Civ 311(27 March 2015) (Dyson MR and Sharp LJ in a joint judgment; McFarlane LJ concurring), affirming the judgment of Tugendhat J (at[2014] EWHC 13 (QB) (16 January 2014)), is a very important decision on damages for invasion of privacy, and it raises significant questions about the correctness of Feeney J’s reasoning in the earlier Irish case of Collins v FBD Insurance plc [2013] IEHC 137 (14 March… [read post]
16 Oct 2011, 5:26 am
On Monday and Tuesday 17 and 18 October 2011 the Supreme Court (Lords Phillips, Brown, Mance, Clarke and Dyson) will hear the appeal of the defendant, Times Newspapers, against the decision of the Court of Appeal ([2010] EWCA Civ 804) that the publication of an article on 2 June 2006 was not covered by Reynolds privilege. [read post]
22 May 2011, 12:00 pm
In Courtroom 1, Gale and another v Serious Organised Crime Agency is to be heard by Lords Phillips, Brown, Mance, Judge, Clarke, Dyson and Reed. [read post]
19 Mar 2018, 6:46 am
The High Court upheld this finding but Lord Dyson reversed the decision. [read post]
28 Nov 2017, 4:44 am
Dyson MR remained unsure whether SIAC would have made the same decision if it had taken B’s fear of reprisals into account. [read post]
5 Dec 2011, 2:07 am
Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v Payne & Anor, heard 4 November 2011. [read post]
8 Feb 2012, 2:27 am
He stated that the judgments in Johnson and Eastwood v Magnox Electric plc; Cornwall County Court v McCabe [2004] UKHL 35 both recognised that provisions in the ERA did not supersede an employee’s common law and contractual rights and he allowed the appeal. [read post]
15 Feb 2012, 1:33 am
Savage; Powell v United Kingdom [2000] 30 EHRR CD 362). [read post]
21 Nov 2011, 1:45 am
Lord Phillips, Lord Brown and Lord Dyson all analysed the cases concerning Austrian judgements alongside another strand of ECtHR authority relating to cases from Norway Ringvold v Norway (Application No. 34964/97) and Y v Norway (2003) 41 EHRR 87. [read post]
30 Jan 2012, 4:29 am
Starting on Monday 30 January 2012 are the appeals of PP v Secretary of State for the Home Department, (formerly VV [Jordan]), PP v Secretary of State for the Home Department, W & BB v Secretary of State for the Home Department and Z, G, U & Y v Secretary of State for the Home Department, scheduled for 1.5 days to be heard by Lords Phillips, Brown, Kerr, Dyson and Wilson. [read post]
23 Mar 2012, 12:00 am
JD (Congo) and others v Secretary of State for the Home Department, Public Law Project [2012] EWCA Civ 327 The Court of Appeal has considered the test for the second stage of appeal in immigration cases, when someone wishes to appeal from the Upper Tribunal to the Court of Appeal. [read post]
16 Jul 2011, 10:00 pm
And the Strasbourg Court has stated unambiguously that it regards the strictest institution permitted by UK law, the Special Immigration Appeals Commission (SIAC), to be a ”fully independent court” which is best placed to ensure that no material was unnecessarily withheld from the detainee (A v United Kingdom 49 EHRR 695). [read post]
12 May 2012, 4:51 am
After two days of argument (spread over three days due to the State Opening of Parliament) judgment was reserved. [read post]
6 Aug 2010, 1:57 am
Maxximmo AG & Ors [2010] EWHC 1872 (Comm) (22 July 2010) High Court (Patents Court) Dyson Ltd v Vax Ltd [2010] EWHC 1923 (Pat) (29 July 2010) Source: www.bailii.org [read post]
3 Jul 2012, 2:11 am
Justice Dyson queries whether the second letter was confirming that request had been refused. [read post]
28 Nov 2017, 4:44 am
Lord Dyson MR, Richards and Black LJJ held that SIAC had no power to impose bail conditions on B because his detention was unlawful. [read post]
