Search for: "Nicholl Claimants"
Results 61 - 80
of 125
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
19 Jul 2012, 11:25 pm
Lambeth LBC v Kay [2006] UKHL 10; [2006] 2 A.C. 465; [2006] H.L.R. 22, per Lord Nichols [61] and Lord Hope [64]. [read post]
19 Jul 2012, 11:25 pm
Lambeth LBC v Kay [2006] UKHL 10; [2006] 2 A.C. 465; [2006] H.L.R. 22, per Lord Nichols [61] and Lord Hope [64]. [read post]
7 Jun 2012, 10:05 pm
Unjust enrichment is (i) the receipt of a benefit that causes loss to the claimant, or (ii) the wrongful receipt of a benefit by the defendant, or (iii) the receipt of a benefit that “belongs” to the claimant (Paras 152, 154, 161) 154. [read post]
24 Apr 2012, 5:20 am
The Claimant was convicted of the murder of his girlfriend Kamila Garsztka on July 25, 2007. [read post]
8 Feb 2012, 2:27 am
” He averred that in Johnson Lord Nicholls was unwilling to create a common law right covering the same ground as the statutory rights not to be unfairly dismissed as it would “fly in the face of the limits Parliament has already prescribed on (such) matters. [read post]
13 Jan 2012, 4:01 pm
He referred to the speech of Lord Nicholls in Tse Wai Chun Paul v Albert Cheng [2001] E.M.L.R. 31. [read post]
3 Nov 2011, 11:53 am
© Max Kennerly. [read post]
27 Oct 2011, 7:55 am
In this week’s case (Nicholls v. [read post]
4 Sep 2011, 11:57 pm
The locus classicus on this area is the speech of Lord Nicholls in Tang Man Sit v Capacious Investments Ltd, where he draws a distinction between two types of alternative remedies- inconsistent and cumulative. [read post]
30 Aug 2011, 2:57 pm
SACKMAN, NICHOLS ON EMINENT DOMAIN §6.01[1] (3d ed. 2006). [read post]
27 Jul 2011, 6:53 am
The claimant’s claim was upheld by the Employment Tribunal, who cited in their judgment a number of procedural errors that amounted to a breach of the claimant’s employment contract. [read post]
27 Jul 2011, 2:43 am
The CA agreed with the claimants. [read post]
22 Jun 2011, 12:31 am
As Lord Nicholls said when giving judgment in the Reynolds case: “Reputation is an integral and important part of the dignity of the individual. [read post]
8 Jun 2011, 5:59 pm
After all, as Lord Nicholls pointed out, why should someone’s intention affect a comment’s usefulness to public debate? [read post]
2 Jun 2011, 12:46 pm
In Nichols v. [read post]
27 May 2011, 6:40 am
As Lord Nicholls observed in Campbell, what the Flitcroft case was actually about wasn’t “disclosure of confidential information which would infringe privacy” but “misuse of private information”. [read post]
25 May 2011, 5:40 am
The case started on February 26, 2009, when Shandria Nichols filed a charge of discrimination with the EEOC. [read post]
15 Apr 2011, 3:42 am
Some of the difficulties created by the Court’s complicated jurisprudence on the concept of “civil rights” are illustrated by a case heard by Nichols J on the same day as the Court of Appeal was deciding – see our post. [read post]
4 Apr 2011, 5:34 pm
If the court agrees with the claimant’s meaning (i.e. if the court rules that the words meant that he had knowingly lied) should it be a defence if the defendant can prove that the claimant was reckless, even though he cannot prove the more serious allegation that the claimant knowingly lied? [read post]
2 Apr 2011, 5:47 pm
” [55] In other words, “the Claimant must be pursuing the legitimate purpose of protecting its reputation. [read post]
