Search for: "State v. So" Results 6081 - 6100 of 117,819
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
13 Dec 2009, 3:22 pm by Adam Wagner
Taking into consideration the cases of A v United Kingdom (3455/05) (2009) 49 EHRR 29 ECHR (Grand Chamber) and Secretary of State for the Home Department v F (2009) UKHL 28, (2009) 3 WLR 74, the claimants’ arguments on this point were upheld. [read post]
11 Dec 2013, 2:13 am by Matrix Legal Information Team
Religion should not be confined to faiths involving a supreme deity, since to do so would exclude Buddhism, Jainism and others; and involve the Court in difficult theological territory. [read post]
21 Oct 2015, 5:00 am by Terry Hart
I say appear to contradict since a panel court cannot overrule prior holdings by the same court, so we are left with a state of tension between the holdings in Cariou and Authors Guild. [read post]
9 Jan 2020, 4:56 pm
 The office is an administrative and bureaucratic nightmare, so designed to prevent independent thinking by a prosecutor. [read post]
14 May 2011, 1:51 am by INFORRM
Last week’s decision of Sharp J in MJN v News Group Newspapers Limited [2011] EWHC 1192 shares some similarities with cases that have caused so much uproar recently, in that it concerns an injunction prohibiting identification of a married premiership footballer who has been having an affair. [read post]
8 Aug 2018, 12:40 pm by Ezra Rosser
Doing so could render Henry a watershed case regarding the criminalization of poverty in Massachusetts and beyond. [read post]
8 Jul 2009, 6:00 am
  And what is the standard for pleading a cause of action in the Golden State? [read post]
1 Nov 2011, 3:00 am by Ted Folkman
The case of the day is United States v. [read post]
6 Sep 2009, 3:06 pm
These are cases in which the People of the State of California are attempting to convict a person for violation of the state penal, vehicle, or health and safety codes. [read post]
1 Aug 2017, 1:05 am by HAZEL WRIGHT, HUNTERS SOLICITORS
Lord Hughes states that the acid test should be whether the application is in substance (impermissibly) to vary or alter the final order or whether it is (permissibly) to support it by working out how it should be carried into effect [54]. [read post]
21 Jun 2016, 1:47 am by Tom Pritchard
Summary On 23 June 2016 the Supreme Court will hear the appeal of Manolete Partners plc v Hastings Borough Council. [read post]