Search for: "Matter of HALL v DAVIS" Results 61 - 80 of 121
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
24 Mar 2024, 5:19 am by Frank Cranmer
Zoe Ingenhaag, Lexology: Gender critical beliefs in the workplace: on Phoenix v The Open University, Meade v Westminster City Council and Anor and Ali v Reason & Nott. [read post]
28 Jan 2011, 5:57 am by Colin Murray
The lack of Parliamentary debate on this issue has been regularly commented upon in recent years, and in this instance Westminster Hall certainly appeared to foster a consensus. [read post]
22 Sep 2020, 4:45 pm by Eugene Volokh
Here's the heart of our argument: {The plaintiff, a police officer, sued the defendants, Ohio citizens who criticized his on-duty conduct providing security at a City Council meeting at Cincinnati City Hall. [read post]
23 Dec 2008, 2:57 pm
However, the matter is remanded for clarification of findings at sentencing with regards to whether defendants possessed the firearms in connection with possession of cocaine. [read post]
23 Mar 2015, 12:42 am by INFORRM
On 18 March 2015, Nicola Davies J heard an application in the case of Lachaux v AOL Ltd. [read post]
26 Feb 2012, 11:48 pm by INFORRM
The editor of the Sunday Times, John Witherow said: “Marie was an extraordinary figure in the life of The Sunday Times, driven by a passion to cover wars in the belief that what she did mattered. [read post]
30 Aug 2015, 9:30 pm by Seth Kreimer
Board of Education and Bolling, of course, began a decade and a half of contention in the courts, streets, and legislative halls. [read post]
29 Apr 2013, 9:36 am by INFORRM
The Commission welcomed the newspaper’s efforts to resolve the matter, but upheld the complaint”. [read post]
2 Jan 2016, 2:51 pm by Thaddeus Mason Pope, J.D., Ph.D.
  Rather, principles of statutory construction, stripped of the presumption’s “tradition” gloss, adequately and accurately reflect allocate regulatory authority over matters of health a [read post]
24 Oct 2022, 5:14 am by INFORRM
The claimant was able to establish that the publication of each of the matters complained of was of a sufficient extent 64] and caused serious harm [77]. [read post]