Search for: "Ace v. State"
Results 781 - 800
of 1,884
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
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]
15 Jun 2015, 12:33 pm
On June 11, 2015, the New York Court of Appeals issued its decision in the closely-followed case of ACE Securities Corp., Home Equity Loan Trust, Series 2006-SL2 v. [read post]
11 Jun 2015, 4:34 am
Lord Sumption, referring to Lord Hoffmann’s speech in Matadeen v Pointu [1999] 1 AC 98 and that of Baroness Hale in Ghaidan v Godin-Mendoza [2004] 2 AC 557, stated that the principle of equality was “not a principle special to the jurisprudence of the European Union. [read post]
8 Jun 2015, 9:24 am
United States), and will clarify the standard for summoning a special three-judge U.S. [read post]
2 Jun 2015, 4:30 am
The case, EEOC v. [read post]
1 Jun 2015, 5:22 am
The House of Lords considered the effect of s 17(1) in Din (Taj) v Wandsworth LBC [1983] 1 AC 657, HL. [read post]
31 May 2015, 3:47 am
As Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead said in Sempra Metals v IRC [2007] UKHL 34; [2008] 1 AC 561 at [51]: "Legal rules which are not soundly based resemble proverbial bad pennies: they turn up again and again. [read post]
28 May 2015, 3:31 pm
Alabama, which was consolidated with Alabama Democratic Conference v. [read post]
22 May 2015, 4:00 am
The defendant relied on the judgment of Lord Dyson in the Supreme Court case of R (Lumba) v Secretary of State for the Home Department ([2012] 1 AC 245 [101]), in which he disapproved the concept of “vindicatory damages”. [read post]
20 May 2015, 3:11 am
Upon considering the rule in Din v Wandsworth London Borough Council [1983] 1 AC 657, Lord Reed reasoned that the review officer did not consider whether the cause of the appellant’s current state of homelessness was her surrender of her tenancy at the hostel. [read post]
17 May 2015, 2:57 am
Siehr recalled the landmark cases of Attorney-General of New Zealand v Ortiz, [1984] AC 1, Winkworth v. [read post]
Case Comment: R (ZH and CN) v London Borough of Newham and London Borough of Lewisham [2014] UKSC 62
14 May 2015, 1:59 am
In Hounslow LBC v Powell; Leeds CC v Hall; Birmingham CC v Frisby [2011] UKSC 8; [2011] 2 AC 18; [2011] HLR 23, the decision in Pinnock was held to be of general application whenever a public authority seek possession of a property that constitutes a person’s home. [read post]
13 May 2015, 4:37 am
This Anheuser-Busch decision was held to be entirely consistent with Lord Diplock’s speech in the landmark Advocaat passing-off case of Erven Warnink BV v J Townend & Sons (Hull) Ltd [1979] AC 731. [read post]
11 May 2015, 3:55 am
The tort of misuse of private information arose as a result of the recognition by the courts that “the values enshrined in Articles 8 and 10 [of the European Convention on Human Rights] are now part of the cause of action for breach of confidence” (Campbell v MGN [2004] 2 AC 457 [17]). [read post]
1 May 2015, 6:44 pm
AC. [read post]
1 May 2015, 12:36 pm
***************************************** On Thursday, April 30, the New York Court of Appeals heard oral argument in ACE Securities Corp. v. [read post]
27 Apr 2015, 1:12 am
TN & MA (Afghanistan) (AP) v Secretary of State for the Home Department; AA (Afghanistan) v Secretary of State for the Home Department, heard 2-5 March 2015. [read post]
22 Apr 2015, 4:08 pm
To improve surveillance, the Council of State and Territorial Epidemiologists has recommended that all L. monocytogenes isolates be forwarded to state public health laboratories for subtyping through the National Molecular Subtyping Network for Foodborne Disease Surveillance (PulseNet). [read post]
17 Apr 2015, 9:30 am
TN & MA (Afghanistan) (AP) v Secretary of State for the Home Department; AA (Afghanistan) v Secretary of State for the Home Department, heard 2-5 March 2015. [read post]