Search for: "Lord v. State" Results 601 - 620 of 4,035
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
25 May 2010, 11:26 pm by INFORRM
The review of the law of libel did not get a mention in the Queen’s Speech but the indefatigable Lib Dem peer Lord Lester of Herne Hill QC is this week presenting a draft private member’s Defamation Bill to the House of Lords with the strong support of the media. [read post]
The current law is now stated in the Equality Act 2010 but the issues in this appeal remain pertinent and are not affected by the revocation of the Regulations. [read post]
18 Jul 2018, 6:28 am by ASAD KHAN
“Precarious” was not, in their Lordships’ view, “a term of art” and was similar but not identical to the guidance imparted in Jeunesse v Netherlands (2015) 60 EHRR 17 whereby family life was rendered precarious from the outset where those “involved were aware that the immigration status of one of them was such that the persistence of that family life within the host state would from the outset be precarious. [read post]
11 Feb 2019, 2:52 am by Walter Olson
[Anand Agneshwar and Paige Sharpe, WLF, and on Mallory v. [read post]
25 Apr 2015, 4:57 pm by INFORRM
In particular, the Council referred to the obiter words of Lord Woolf MR in Broadmoor Special Hospital Authority v Robinson [2000] QB 775: “if a public body is given a statutory responsibility which it is required to perform in the public interest, then, in the absence of an implication to the contrary in the statute, it has standing to apply to the court for an injunction to prevent interference with its performance of its public responsibilities and the courts should grant… [read post]
  Lord Clarke repeated a useful quotation of Longmore LJ from Barclays Bank plc v HHY Luxembourg SARL [2010] EWCA Civ 1248: “If a clause is capable of two meanings…it is quite possible that neither meaning will flout common sense. [read post]
7 Dec 2020, 11:10 pm by Riana Harvey
Lord Justice Arnold - ‘Website-blocking injunctions and streaming server-blocking injunctions: the state of the art’The event’s keynote speaker Lord Justice Arnold kicked things off with an overview of the different types of liability in the UK, looking also at the legislative basis for intermediary liability in the EU and the UK. [read post]
23 Oct 2006, 3:43 am by Tobias Thienel
London Borough of Enfield [2001] 2 AC 550, per Lord Browne-Wilkinson; this terminology was misunderstood by the ECtHR in Osman v. [read post]
2 Nov 2011, 12:57 pm
Under this heading, Lord Neuberger recounted the intervention of the BioIndustry Association (BIA), which was stated to represent members with an aggregate turnover in 2010 of £5.5 billion. [read post]
16 Jun 2023, 1:29 am by CMS
Since, however, this court is bound by Novo, it is for the Supreme Court to decide whether to depart from the law as stated by Lord Dyson in that case”. [read post]
27 Nov 2013, 2:20 am by Matrix Legal Information Team
The Court stated that its judgment does not favour sexual orientation over religious belief – had the respondents refused rooms to the appellants because of their Christian beliefs, the appellants would have been equally protected by the prohibition of discrimination. [read post]
27 Nov 2013, 2:20 am by Matrix LegalĀ  Information Team
The Court stated that its judgment does not favour sexual orientation over religious belief – had the respondents refused rooms to the appellants because of their Christian beliefs, the appellants would have been equally protected by the prohibition of discrimination. [read post]
8 Aug 2018, 2:02 am by INFORRM
In Bonnard v Perryman, Lord Coleridge CJ found that it was sufficient for a defendant to merely assert an intention to justify the allegations in order to successfully resist an interlocutory injunction to restrain the publication of a libel. [read post]
19 May 2015, 2:20 am by Guy Stuckey-Clarke, Olswang LLP
The prosecution appealed to the Supreme Court, and the appeal was heard on 24 February 2015 by Lord Neuberger, Lord Kerr, Lord Reed, Lord Hughes and Lord Toulson. [read post]
15 May 2012, 1:04 am by NL
Following on Bahta & Ors, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department & Ors [2011] EWCA Civ 895 [Our report] and Lord Jackson’s view on JR costs, the Court of Appeal in M v London Borough of Croydon [2012] EWCA Civ 595 has given general guidance for awarding costs. [read post]
15 May 2012, 1:04 am by NL
Following on Bahta & Ors, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department & Ors [2011] EWCA Civ 895 [Our report] and Lord Jackson’s view on JR costs, the Court of Appeal in M v London Borough of Croydon [2012] EWCA Civ 595 has given general guidance for awarding costs. [read post]
16 Jul 2017, 4:23 pm by INFORRM
This wrongly states that Impress made the damages award. [read post]