Search for: "ACE LTD"
Results 621 - 640
of 768
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
2 Feb 2018, 5:51 am
Ace European Group Ltd., No. 17-cv-5579 (D. [read post]
19 Jan 2009, 1:52 am
This is consistent with the approach to art 39 adopted by Lord Browne Wilkinson and Lord Goff of Chieveley in the House of Lords in R v Bow Street Metropolitan Stipendiary Magistrate; Ex parte Pinochet Ugarte [No 3] [2000] 1 AC 147; [1999] UKHL 17. [read post]
4 Jan 2023, 1:34 am
It considered the scope of a defendant’s duty of care laid down in South Australia Asset Management Corpn v York Montague Ltd [1997] AC 191 (“SAAMCO”) as determinative of the issue. [read post]
28 Dec 2016, 3:13 pm
The court was persuaded In Wilson v First County Trust Ltd (No. 2) [2004] 1 AC 816, Lord Hope stated at paragraph 106:- “… Article I of the First Protocol has a similar character [to Article 6(1)]. [read post]
25 Jan 2013, 4:50 am
Unlike, say, Campbell v MGN Ltd [2004] AC 457, [2004] UKHL 22 (6 May 2004), this is not a case of Cowen on intensely private and personal time, seeking private help for very personal demons. [read post]
5 Mar 2011, 5:28 am
As I have already pointed out, in Campbell v MGN Ltd the public interest was said to arise from the fact that Ms Campbell had publicly lied to conceal her drug habit. [read post]
Foreign Judgments: The Limits of Transnational Issue Estoppel, Reciprocity, and Transnational Comity
26 May 2021, 8:40 pm
A distinctive feature of Singapore law on issue estoppel is the rejection of the broadly worded “special circumstances” exception to issue in English common law (Arnold v National Westminster Bank plc [1991] 2 AC 93). [read post]
21 Dec 2017, 4:10 am
As Lord Carnwath concluded after his illuminating discussion of the standard required of planning reasons (at paras 35-42), the question will be “whether the information so provided by the authority leaves room for ‘genuine doubt … as to what (it) has decided and why’” (at para 42, citing Sir Thomas Bingham MR in Clarke Homes Ltd v Secretary of State for the Environment (1993) 66 P & CR 263). [read post]
22 Oct 2011, 6:38 am
Indeed, as Lord Hoffmann himself said in BCCI v Ali [2002] 1 AC 251 at 269, the primary source for understanding what the parties meant is their language interpreted in accordance with conventional usage. [read post]
28 May 2011, 10:04 am
” This principle was then fleshed out in Prebble v Television New Zealand Ltd [1995] 1 AC 321 : …the courts and Parliament are both astute to recognise their respective constitutional roles. [read post]
4 Jan 2011, 8:52 am
i4i Ltd. [read post]
30 Jan 2007, 6:16 pm
Opposer argued that this case is analogous to Medinol Ltd. v. [read post]
11 Nov 2017, 2:31 am
Such an interdependency can also be drawn between meaning and the likelihood of serious harm as highlighted by Davis LJ in the recent case of Lachaux v Independent Print Ltd [2017] EWCA Civ 1334. [read post]
2 Feb 2018, 5:51 am
Ace European Group Ltd., No. 17-cv-5579 (D. [read post]
8 Feb 2012, 2:27 am
In the previous decision of Johnson v Unisys Ltd [2001] UKHL 13; [2003] 1 AC 518 the House of Lords held that a claimant employee seeking damages for loss arising out of breach of an implied term of their contract in relation to their unfair dismissal would only be able to recover those damages in the employment tribunal under the remedies stipulated in the Employment Rights Act 1996 and not under the standard remedy for breach of contract in the civil courts. [read post]
3 Jun 2021, 4:44 pm
The Judge found that the language of the publication in this case meant that serious harm could be inferred, despite the fact that publication was only to one (the Defendant’s sister) and that she had already been told by X of the Claimant’s alleged assault by the time of the publication (the latter point irrelevant in light of the rule in Associated Newspapers Ltd v Dingle [1964] AC 371). [read post]
5 Nov 2020, 4:56 pm
They point out that in Bonnick v Morris ([2003] 1 AC 300) the Privy Council took the view that the single meaning rule could not be applied without modification when a court was considering the Reynolds defence and the question of whether a journalist had acted responsibly. [read post]
27 Oct 2010, 11:28 pm
But in R (Alconbury Developments Ltd) v Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions [2001] UKHL 23, [2003] 2 AC 295, para 26, Lord Slynn of Hadley said that the court should follow any clear and constant jurisprudence of the Strasbourg court.There are degrees; if there is a perception that Strasbourg has misconstrued UK law domestic courts will not follow their conclusion But when faced with a unanimous decision of the Grand Chamber, this was, in itself,… [read post]
19 Jul 2009, 9:03 pm
Qionglai introduced a 29.90-million-US-dollar sanitary material production project from Taiwan On July 14th, Qionglai county government and the Taiwan-invested Chengdu Kang Na Hsiung Enterprise Co., Ltd., held a signing ceremony for the sanitary material accessory project. [read post]
22 Jun 2022, 12:37 am
The defendants were convicted on a majority verdict of 10 to 2; their appeal went all the way to the House of Lords and was dismissed: Whitehouse v Lemon and Gay News Ltd [1979] AC 617. [read post]
