Search for: "Hale v. Hale"
Results 661 - 680
of 1,471
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
3 Apr 2015, 9:51 pm
Supreme Court's decision in B&B Hardware v. [read post]
3 Apr 2015, 3:57 pm
Lady Hale accepts the validity of these criticisms and finds (para.36) that WCC gave no serious consideration to its obligations in Ms N’s case. [read post]
3 Apr 2015, 11:28 am
R(N) v Westminster City Council [2015] EWHC 799 (Admin) (26 February 2015) [Not on Bailii, we’ve seen a transcript.] [read post]
2 Apr 2015, 9:14 am
Lady Hale therefore concluded that Westminster still owed the appellant a duty to secure suitable accommodation. [read post]
1 Apr 2015, 8:46 am
The lawfulness of the cap was addressed by the Supreme Court in R (SG & Ors) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [2015] UKSC 16. [read post]
31 Mar 2015, 12:29 pm
See Hale v. [read post]
31 Mar 2015, 12:13 pm
See Badouh v. [read post]
30 Mar 2015, 3:00 pm
The Court closes out the last day of its March argument session with the second of a pair of bankruptcy cases, Harris v. [read post]
30 Mar 2015, 1:07 am
Lady Hale, Lord Reed and Lord Hughes concurred in both judgments. [read post]
29 Mar 2015, 2:25 pm
However, and unfortunately for Mr A-L, while Baroness Hale, and indeed others, would have remitted the case for trial, there had been supervening events. [read post]
20 Mar 2015, 2:41 pm
This was followed shortly after by Glos CC v AB on March 2nd. [read post]
18 Mar 2015, 9:57 am
The more recent development of that approach by Hale LJ in Eagle v Chambers [2003] EWCA Civ was also cited approvingly by the Court. [read post]
18 Mar 2015, 3:52 am
Lady Hale, giving the leading judgment, stated that the respondent’s general manager should not simply have accepted the view of the inquiry that suicide was the most likely explanation for Mr Braganza’s disappearance. [read post]
18 Mar 2015, 3:38 am
Lady Hale, dissenting, stated that what has to be considered is whether the benefit cap as it applies to lone parents can be justified independently of its discriminatory effects. [read post]
16 Mar 2015, 10:00 am
Judgment was handed down in respect of this subsequent hearing on 23 July 2014 in Coventry and others (Respondents) v Lawrence and another (Appellants) (No 2) [2014] UKSC 46. [read post]
16 Mar 2015, 8:35 am
Lady Hale at [99] noted that whilst the court would not always take the government’s word for it, foreign policy and national security were government business. [read post]
12 Mar 2015, 8:16 am
The previous leading authority on “white list” designation was R (Javed) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2001] EWCA Civ 789. [read post]
5 Mar 2015, 4:16 pm
John Catt has indicated that he will take the case to the European Court of Human Rights – historically the court has been far stricter on the requirement of accordance with the law and therefore far less willing to allow the state wide discretionary powers where privacy and surveillance are concerned, resulting in a series of rulings against the UK – see Malone v UK (1984), Hewitt v UK (1992), Liberty & Others v UK (2008), S & Marper… [read post]
5 Mar 2015, 5:52 am
Since Daimler AG v. [read post]
4 Mar 2015, 3:09 am
Lady Hale agreed with the majority, but noted that since Mr Catt has not been and is not likely to be involved in criminal activity, it would have been disproportionate to keep a nominal record about him. [read post]
