Search for: "Hale v. Hale"
Results 741 - 760
of 1,468
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
15 Apr 2014, 9:59 am
The post Case Comment – Aintree University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust v James [2013] UKSC 67 appeared first on UKSCBlog. [read post]
11 Apr 2014, 3:56 am
Hounga v Allen and another asks if a race discrimination claim arising from employment is barred if the employment contract is tainted by illegality. [read post]
7 Apr 2014, 9:26 am
This position, outlined in his work Historia Placitorum Coronæ, or The History of the Pleas of the Crown, was finally rejected in England by the House of Lords in the case of R. v. [read post]
2 Apr 2014, 1:52 pm
As I read this opinion, I initially thought that it concerned an issue that should probably be reviewed by the California Supreme Court. [read post]
26 Mar 2014, 11:09 am
” These exchanges occurred Wednesday as the Court heard the case of Wood v. [read post]
19 Mar 2014, 1:42 am
Judgment The judgment of the court was given by Lord Reed, with whom the rest of their Lordships (Lord Neuberger, Baroness Hale, Lord Kerr and Lord Clarke) agreed. [read post]
7 Mar 2014, 1:34 am
Accordingly, their claims for compensation for injury to feelings could not succeed. [54] Judgment Judgment for the Supreme Court was given by Lord Toulson, with whom Lady Hale and Lords Neuberger, Reed and Hughes agreed. [read post]
5 Mar 2014, 2:11 am
Lady Hale considered it disturbing that the Convention excludes damages claims for breaches of individuals’ fundamental rights, and the parties to the Convention should address the grave injustice done to those in the appellant’s position. [read post]
4 Mar 2014, 6:00 am
Rambo of the Federal Middle District Court of Pennsylvania addressed such a scenario under the Federal Rules of Discovery in her recent decision in the case of Johnson v. [read post]
3 Mar 2014, 2:02 am
The issue for the bench (L Hale, L Wilson, L Sumption, L Reed, and L Collins) is whether a purchaser may create an equitable interest capable of binding third parties at the point of the contract of sale; and whether the principles set out in Abbey National B.S. v Cann [1991] AC 56 are applicable. [read post]
27 Feb 2014, 9:05 pm
In Hall v. [read post]
25 Feb 2014, 3:07 pm
In Walden v. [read post]
24 Feb 2014, 2:26 pm
The morning’s proceedings begin with a return to Al-Nashiri’s alleged role in the attack on the French oil tanker the M/V Limburg in Yemen in October 2002. [read post]
24 Feb 2014, 2:12 am
Listed for two days from this morning in Courtroom 2 is the appeal of Barnes (as former Court Appointed Receiver) v The Eastenders Group & Anor, to be heard by L Hale, L Kerr, L Wilson, L Hughes and L Toulson. [read post]
21 Feb 2014, 9:03 pm
The lead case is Utility Air Regulatory Group v. [read post]
13 Feb 2014, 5:49 am
But back to Durkin v DSG Retail Ltd and HFC Bank Plc. [read post]
5 Feb 2014, 8:04 pm
Minimum wage laws are sentimental legislation with all-too-real effects [Jeffrey Dorfman] “Our Business’s Response to California $2 Minimum Wage Increase” [Coyote, with more on a union angle on minimum wage laws] Some experience from Europe [Steve Hanke, more, Cato overview of minimum wage debate] Connecticut fires state labor department employee who gamed system to get benefits for friend, then reinstates after grievance [Raising Hale] Oldie but goodie: union… [read post]
2 Feb 2014, 7:21 am
‘Possible landmarks could include: the Contagious Diseases Acts 1864-6; the statue of Emmeline Pankhurst in Victoria Tower Gardens; The Well of Loneliness trial; Williams & Glyn’s Bank v Boland [1981]; S41 of the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act; the appointment of Lady Hale. [read post]
28 Jan 2014, 1:19 am
Lady Hale agrees with this analysis when applied to the youngest child. [65]. [read post]
19 Jan 2014, 4:02 pm
“Transaction costs, privacy, and trust: The laudable goals and ultimate failure of notice and choice to respect privacy online”, Kirsten Martin, First Monday, Next week in the courts On 22 and 23 January 2014, the Supreme Court (Lady Hale and Lords Wilson, Reed, Hughes and Hodge) will hear the case of Secretary of State for Home Department v A. [read post]
