Search for: "Herring v. Commissioner" Results 801 - 820 of 3,546
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
27 Jul 2020, 1:41 am by Matrix Legal Support Service
The following Supreme Court judgments remain outstanding: Keefe (by his litigation friend Eyton) v Hoteles Pinero Canarias SL, heard 7 Mar 2017 Arcadia Petroleum Ltd & Ors v Bosworth & Anor, heard 10-11 Apr 2017 Vedanta Resources Plc & Anor v Lungowe & Ors, heard 15-16 Jan 2019 Test Claimants in the Franked Investment Income Group Litigation & Ors v Commissioners of Inland Revenue, heard 27 June 2019 Unwired Planet International Ltd… [read post]
26 Jul 2020, 4:35 pm by INFORRM
On 1 July 2020 the Irish Court of Appeal handed down judgment in the case of Nowak v Data Protection Commissioner [2020] IECA 175 which dealt with the limits of the concept of “personal data”. [read post]
21 Jul 2020, 7:08 pm by David Cross and Nazreen Ali
” In coming to this view, Bromberg J considered, but ultimately decided not to follow, a number of earlier decisions of the High Court and the NSW Court of Appeal  (Neale v Atlas Products (Victoria) Pty Ltd (1955) 94 CLR 419; World Book (Australia) Pty Ltd v Commission of Taxation (1992) 27 NSWLR 377; Vabu Pty Ltd v Commissioner of Taxation (1996) 81 IR 150)) which dealt with the meaning of “contract that is wholly or principally for the… [read post]
21 Jul 2020, 4:00 am by John Gregory
An overlap of e-signatures and Internet voting presented some legal challenges in Australia, leading to a decision I found problematic in a 2014 case comment on Getup Ltd v Elections Commissioner. [read post]
20 Jul 2020, 2:26 am by UKSC Blog
The following Supreme Court judgments remain outstanding: Keefe (by his litigation friend Eyton) v Hoteles Pinero Canarias SL, heard 7 Mar 2017 Arcadia Petroleum Ltd & Ors v Bosworth & Anor, heard 10-11 Apr 2017 Vedanta Resources Plc & Anor v Lungowe & Ors, heard 15-16 Jan 2019 Test Claimants in the Franked Investment Income Group Litigation & Ors v Commissioners of Inland Revenue, heard 27 June 2019 Unwired Planet International Ltd… [read post]
19 Jul 2020, 4:12 pm by INFORRM
Data Privacy and Data Protection On 16 July 2020 the CJEU handed down judgement in the case of Data Protection Commissioner v Facebook Ireland, Case-311/18 – generally known as “Schrems II”. [read post]
18 Jul 2020, 9:40 am by Guest Blogger
  Koppelman has made one, and I will join him – with just a few small differences – here.To assess Koppelman’s claims, I am going to return to Masterpiece Cakeshop v. [read post]
As we wrote here, AB5 codified and expanded the “ABC test” adopted by the California Supreme Court in Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. [read post]
13 Jul 2020, 2:30 am by Matrix Legal Support Service
On Wednesday 15 July 2020, the Supreme Court will also hand judgment in Sutherland (AP) v Her Majesty’s Advocate (Scotland). [read post]
12 Jul 2020, 8:06 pm by Omar Ha-Redeye
Bailey and Timothy Caulfield state, One concern that consistently emerges in relation to obtaining genetic information is the worry that an individual may be discriminated against on the basis of his or her genetic make-up and, specifically, on the basis of a predisposition to a certain condition or disease. [read post]
12 Jul 2020, 4:28 pm by INFORRM
Resolved – IPSO mediation 02327-20 Lawson v The Gazette (Paisley), Resolved – IPSO mediation Last Week in the Courts On 6 July 2020 Saini J handed down judgment in the case of Spicer v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis [2020] EWHC 1778 (QB). [read post]
11 Jul 2020, 7:18 pm by Mark Summerfield
In a postscript to last month’s decision in Aristocrat Technologies Australia Pty Limited v Commissioner of Patents [2020] FCA 778 (see Federal Court Finds Computer-Implemented Gaming Machine Patent-Eligible in Australia), the court has now ruled that the Commissioner of Patents should pay only 50% of Aristocrat’s costs associated with its expert evidence. [read post]
11 Jul 2020, 3:19 am by Jeanne Huang
Comments: Regarding substituted service, the Facebook judgment provides that[4] ‘[t]his Court has held, in circumstances analogous to the present, that an order for substituted service may be made under either r 10.24 or r 10.49 : Commissioner of Taxation v Zeitouni (2013) 306 ALR 603 at [60] (Katzmann J); see also: Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Kokos International Pty Ltd [2007] FCA 2035 at [18] (French J); Commissioner of Taxation… [read post]
10 Jul 2020, 4:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
The Board found, among other things, that the ALJ did not abuse her discretion in denying an adjournment and affirmed the ALJ's determination. [read post]
10 Jul 2020, 4:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
The Board found, among other things, that the ALJ did not abuse her discretion in denying an adjournment and affirmed the ALJ's determination. [read post]
5 Jul 2020, 4:37 pm by INFORRM
  She refused the claimant permission for her McKenzie friend to make oral submissions on her behalf. [read post]
2 Jul 2020, 8:47 am by Dennis Crouch
The Patent Commissioner dismissed the opposition — siding with Kirkland. [read post]
30 Jun 2020, 4:25 pm by Patricia Hughes
However, I often find that time is an elusive concept and for me the “nearness” of Noble v. [read post]