Search for: "High v State" Results 6461 - 6480 of 35,518
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
7 Jul 2010, 2:00 pm by Tamar Weinrib
  With the Supreme Court's recent decision in Morrison v. [read post]
30 Jul 2009, 6:51 pm
-->-->*-->* Document published online at Internet Law & Regulation-->Commentary & discussion:[]-->--> -->-->BY MARC BOURGEOISTestimony in day four of Sony v. [read post]
17 Sep 2014, 9:43 pm by Badrinath Srinivasan
A Three Judge Bench of the Supreme Court has comprehensively decided on "court" in the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 in the case of State of West Bengal v. [read post]
4 Oct 2009, 10:06 am by Silverberg Zalantis LLP
In addition, as the fence was eight feet high and not in compliance with the local code a variance was obtained for the fence. [read post]
4 Oct 2009, 10:06 am by Silverberg Zalantis LLP
In addition, as the fence was eight feet high and not in compliance with the local code a variance was obtained for the fence. [read post]
12 May 2012, 4:11 am by Badrinath Srinivasan
(2) If the court should have examined whether to refuse enforcement under Section 48(1)(a) for the reasons stated, has the Delhi High Court impliedly followed the Supreme Court in reading public policy in a wider manner (See, Phulchand Exports Ltd. v. [read post]
25 Sep 2012, 11:26 am by admin
In early August, the former judges and prosecutors signed onto an amicus brief that urges the Supreme Court to grant certiorari in United States v. [read post]
8 Nov 2016, 2:02 am by Sir Paul Jenkins QC (Hon)
A short case comment on R (Miller & Anor) v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union & Ors [2016] EWHC 2768 (Admin), which will likely be appealed to the Supreme Court. [read post]
28 Jan 2018, 11:02 am by Anthony Gaughan
The most important election law case before the United States Supreme Court this term is Gill v. [read post]
7 Dec 2011, 5:51 am
State, Jason Dirk Walton argued that he received ineffective assistance of counsel under the 2009 decision, Porter v. [read post]
6 Oct 2015, 9:13 pm by Florian Mueller
Alsup of the United States District Court for the Northern District of California issued a third case management order in the remand proceedings of the Oracle v. [read post]
9 Oct 2013, 3:18 pm by Giles Peaker
While the provision considered is effectively the same, there is a distinction made in terms of justification of policy which may be significant.It is a reasoned decision based on Article 14, distinguishing MA & Ors, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions & Ors [2013] EWHC 2213 (QB). [read post]