Search for: "AC v. State"
Results 761 - 780
of 1,882
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
1 Sep 2015, 7:22 pm
Pediatrics 108: e59-59 Mead PM, Slutsker L, Dietz V, McCaig LF, Bresee JS, Shapiro C, Griffin PM, and Tauxe RV. (1999). [read post]
28 Aug 2015, 7:30 am
He applied his Guidance on the Identification of the Ordinary Residence of People in Need of Community Care Services, England, which purported to apply the House of Lords judgment in R v Barnet LBC, ex parte Shah [1983] 2 AC 309 and Turner J’s judgment in R v Waltham Forest, ex parte Vale The Times, 25 February 1985. [read post]
23 Aug 2015, 6:52 am
., Inc. v. [read post]
11 Aug 2015, 2:00 am
In contrast, Lord Kerr’s dissenting judgment adopts a far more structured approach to proportionality, closely analysing the four questions identified by Lord Reed in Bank Mellat v HM Treasury (No 2) [2014] AC 700, with particular emphasis on the rational connection between the interference and the legislative objective and the “least intrusive means” test [21]. [read post]
6 Aug 2015, 5:09 am
In addition to the key case of Rottmann v Freistaat Bayern [2010] ECR I-1449 numerous other authorities such as Kaur [2001] All ER (EC) 250, McCarthy [2011] All ER (EC) 729 Zambrano [2011] ECR I-1177 and Dereci [2011] ECR I-11315 were analysed and applied to his case. [read post]
5 Aug 2015, 7:58 am
The Supreme Court recently clarified in Crawford v. [read post]
2 Aug 2015, 9:01 pm
The plaintiffs in Evenwel v. [read post]
1 Aug 2015, 4:40 pm
In Cream Holdings Ltd v Banerjee [2005] 1 AC 253, the House of Lords provided some flexibility in respect of the interpretation of the term “likely” here but the judge considered simply that he had to show that “the defendant is likely to fail to establish one of the statutory defences”. [read post]
29 Jul 2015, 9:01 pm
Remarkably, the Court has only focused on this substantive question at all in one case, Burns v. [read post]
25 Jul 2015, 11:10 am
These include questions about the “Premium” and “Choice” offerings and the state of AC’s licensing negotiations.It is also notable that Mr. [read post]
14 Jul 2015, 6:22 pm
[1] Ohio in The State of Ohio v. [read post]
14 Jul 2015, 4:12 pm
City of Irvine v. [read post]
8 Jul 2015, 12:23 pm
In Bush’s case, the Supreme Court had wrongly made him President in Bush v. [read post]
6 Jul 2015, 6:34 am
Lord Kerr (for the minority) noted that REP was the “touchstone” of private life (applying Campbell v MGN [2004] 2 AC 457). [read post]
3 Jul 2015, 4:40 pm
Lord Kerr (for the minority) noted that REP was the “touchstone” of private life (applying Campbell v MGN [2004] 2 AC 457). [read post]
1 Jul 2015, 2:37 am
In giving the lead judgment, Lord Sumption stated that the fundamental principle of the common law of damages is the compensatory principle. [read post]
30 Jun 2015, 6:38 am
Ver United States v. [read post]
29 Jun 2015, 2:02 am
Mandalia v Secretary of State for the Home Department, heard 7 May 2015. [read post]
26 Jun 2015, 1:30 pm
This morning the Court announced its decision in Obergefell v. [read post]
17 Jun 2015, 4:40 pm
************************************ On June 11, 2015, New York’s Court of Appeals unanimously affirmed the Appellate Division, First Department’s decision in ACE Securities Corp. v. [read post]
