Search for: "KEY v. LONDON"
Results 61 - 80
of 1,062
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
17 Oct 2023, 2:26 am
On 13 October 2023, Mr Justice Julian Knowles handed down judgement in Aaronson v Stones [2023] EWHC 2399 (KB). [read post]
2 Oct 2023, 1:51 am
Two women who were arrested while attending a Sarah Everard vigil in Clapham Common, London in 2021 have been paid substantial damages and received an apology from the Metropolitan Police. [read post]
1 Oct 2023, 10:16 am
On a) the first instance Judge had correctly held that there were deficiencies in Reading’s formal Equality Act assessment, but also correctly found, following London & Quadrant Housing Trust v Patrick (2019) EWHC 1263 (QB) (our note) that the PSED did not have to be in the form of a single formal exercise. [read post]
22 Sep 2023, 10:39 pm
United KingdomUnison v. [read post]
20 Sep 2023, 5:50 am
The case is captioned Gambrill v. [read post]
23 Aug 2023, 7:45 pm
I was delighted to be given an opportunity to address the participants in the Workshop-Conference: Technological Platforms and National Security in Hong Kong: The Domain of Standards Setting, sponsored by the Law and Technology Center and the Philip K.H. [read post]
18 Aug 2023, 3:43 am
There are several key pieces of UK legislation which may apply to international companies i.e. which have extra-territorial reach and which international businesses, including Indian businesses, should take note of. [read post]
16 Aug 2023, 4:55 pm
The case is Esper v NHS North West London Integrated Care Board [2023] EWCOP 29; [2023] WLR(D) 300, and is a decision of Mr Justice Poole. [read post]
14 Aug 2023, 2:34 pm
Still not a binding precedent, but of persuasive value (and will be followed in the London courts). [read post]
14 Aug 2023, 12:29 am
Special thanks to Charlotte Lee, Intern for her contributions to this article. [1] Public Prosecutor v Loh Cheok San [2023] SGHC 190. [2] https://www.cpib.gov.sg/press-room/press-releases/bunkering-company-and-staff-charged-cheating-and-disguising-benefits. [3] Prime Shipping Corp v Public Prosecutor [2021] 4 SLR 795, citing Tom-Reck Security Services Pte Ltd v Public Prosecutor [2001] 1 SLR(R) 327. [read post]
31 Jul 2023, 12:53 pm
Staff supported residents, and each was given a key worker. [read post]
28 Jul 2023, 9:48 am
Lenovo, Optis v. [read post]
23 Jul 2023, 11:10 am
As per Schon v London Borough of Camden (1986) 18 HLR 341, the test for being a residential occupier was the same as under Rent Act 1977. [read post]
21 Jul 2023, 11:56 am
‘Yegiazaryan v. [read post]
18 Jul 2023, 7:12 pm
(Broekman, supra., p. v). [read post]
9 Jul 2023, 4:46 am
: on two significant decisions on the legal recognition of same-sex couples: Buhuceanu and Others v Romania and Maymulakhin and Markiv v Ukraine. [read post]
19 Jun 2023, 4:52 am
Moreover, the abundance of scams across a booming digital art space has created a phenomenon called FUD – fear, uncertainty, and doubt — to a level that can significantly affect traders’ NFT experiences.[3] According to the report by Elliptic, a London-based provider of crypto asset risk management services to businesses worldwide, the NFT scam wave has “the potential to reduce the accessibility or enjoyment with NFTs to both new and existing traders. [read post]
18 Jun 2023, 11:19 am
UO v London Borough of Redbridge (2023) EWHC 1355 (Admin) Ms UO and her 3 children, aged 11, 5 and 3, were homeless and had applied to LB Redbridge. [read post]
12 Jun 2023, 10:43 pm
Cal.): FTC's Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order Federal Trade Commission v. [read post]
7 Jun 2023, 8:06 am
One key overlap between Mr Justice Smith's approach in Optis v. [read post]
