Search for: "STATE IN THE INTEREST OF S. V. & C. V."
Results 61 - 80
of 6,506
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
19 Jan 2014, 9:00 pm
” (CAT/C/GC/3, para. 42) The ECtHR in Jones v. [read post]
28 Mar 2017, 12:04 pm
Hilcorp Energy Co., 2016-C-2181 (2017). [2] See e.g., XXI Oil & Gas, LLC v. [read post]
7 Oct 2014, 2:48 pm
Stated plainly, business interests = public interests. [read post]
27 Jan 2011, 7:01 am
Recommended & quite interesting. [read post]
28 Feb 2008, 6:02 am
State v. [read post]
29 Jun 2014, 10:09 am
The secondhand Facebook stalking is the most interesting. [read post]
16 Dec 2013, 1:52 am
R (HS2 Action Alliance Ltd) v The Secretary of State for Transport & Anor, R (Heathrow Hub Limited & Anor) v The Secretary of State for Transport & Anor, and R (Buckinghamshire County Council & Ors) v The Secretary of State for Transport, heard 15 – 16 October 2013. [read post]
25 Feb 2011, 1:36 am
ri v. [read post]
6 Jul 2022, 7:02 am
Supreme Court’s decision in Lyng v. [read post]
3 Feb 2019, 4:44 pm
This does not mean that the interest is itself a legacy: Foster v. [read post]
19 Apr 2007, 2:47 pm
Fried has issued a new order in the pending case of Sullivan &;amp; Cromwell v. [read post]
16 Jun 2017, 12:33 pm
Charlie’s Waste Services, LLC v. [read post]
23 Apr 2023, 1:22 pm
C. [read post]
20 Apr 2010, 3:04 pm
C&S Properties Holding Company Ltd, the owner installed a chain-link fence, trees and shrubs, signage and rip-rap along an easement. [read post]
9 Jul 2023, 10:59 am
In United States v. [read post]
29 Sep 2008, 10:21 am
Jones Day v. [read post]
18 Sep 2008, 3:43 am
Either way, kudos to Kent and C&;amp;C. [read post]
2 Dec 2014, 7:35 am
The judgment is available here on BAILII, and the case is properly called Idenix Pharmaceutical, Inc v Gilead Sciences, Inc & Ors [2014] EWHC 3916 (Pat) (01 December 2014).The technical field is treatments for Hepatitis C; the specific area is nucleoside analogues having alleged activity against Hepatitis C Virus and other viruses of the Flaviviridae family. [read post]
24 Apr 2016, 10:11 am
In the end (Article 2001(2)(c)), only three Ministers of the States Party to NAFTA, convened as the Free Trade Commission, can “resolve disputes that may arise regarding [NAFTA’s] interpretation or application. [read post]
15 Sep 2015, 1:00 am
R (Lumsdon & Ors) v Legal Services Board [2015] UKSC 41, 24 June 2015 (see judgment). [read post]
