Search for: "People v. House"
Results 8361 - 8380
of 12,874
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
22 Nov 2012, 11:25 am
They are derived from a licence given to the agency by the property owner.If we take this at face value, and put aside thoughts of Street v Mountford and Bruton v London & Quadrant Housing Trust [2000] 1 AC 406, then these may indeed be licences to occupy, rather than tenancies.But what of the two week notice period to terminate the occupier’s licence asserted by many of these Property Guardian firms (for example here, here, here and here)? [read post]
22 Nov 2012, 11:25 am
They are derived from a licence given to the agency by the property owner.If we take this at face value, and put aside thoughts of Street v Mountford and Bruton v London & Quadrant Housing Trust [2000] 1 AC 406, then these may indeed be licences to occupy, rather than tenancies.But what of the two week notice period to terminate the occupier’s licence asserted by many of these Property Guardian firms (for example here, here, here and here)? [read post]
21 Nov 2012, 4:00 am
RSC spokesman Brian Staessle remarked upon retracting the brief that ”we hope people will now use this opportunity to engage in polite and serious discussion of copyright law. [read post]
21 Nov 2012, 3:30 am
The policyholder will have his day in court. 1Dean v. [read post]
20 Nov 2012, 10:25 am
The House of Lords in Reynolds v Times Newspapers Ltd [2001] 2 AC 127 explained why English law should adopt a different approach. [read post]
15 Nov 2012, 9:49 pm
People may freely choose to stay, and it appears as though the Forum members and other Episcopalians will do so -- along with the rectors of some twelve parishes. [read post]
15 Nov 2012, 5:30 am
Many people, even today, are hesitant to walk away from a house due to the impact it will have on credit and future purchases while trying to rebuild after a divorce. [read post]
14 Nov 2012, 3:59 pm
Florida Democratic Party v. [read post]
14 Nov 2012, 3:59 pm
Florida Democratic Party v. [read post]
13 Nov 2012, 5:28 am
It’s not a housing case, but it is worth repeating what was said by the President of the Divisional Court because it underlines the significance of the new N463 and out of hours form:7. [read post]
12 Nov 2012, 1:20 pm
People v. [read post]
12 Nov 2012, 8:03 am
Mozes v. [read post]
12 Nov 2012, 5:20 am
Louis Fisher, "People v. [read post]
11 Nov 2012, 4:15 pm
The Council takes the view that homeless applicants will not jump to the top of the housing queue with the result that people who are overcrowded or badly housed for medical or social reasons move down the list. [read post]
11 Nov 2012, 4:15 pm
The Council takes the view that homeless applicants will not jump to the top of the housing queue with the result that people who are overcrowded or badly housed for medical or social reasons move down the list. [read post]
9 Nov 2012, 5:31 am
The federal district court judge who has the case began his analysis of Meregildo’s motion by noting that the4th Amendment guarantees that all people shall be `secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures. [read post]
9 Nov 2012, 5:31 am
(As an aside at this point, notice how the word "Community" is used in section (g): as most people would understand it. [read post]
8 Nov 2012, 9:51 am
E.g., San Diego Navy Broadway Complex Coalition v. [read post]
8 Nov 2012, 9:51 am
’”); Friends of Juana Briones House v. [read post]
8 Nov 2012, 7:35 am
(I briefly discussed this idea in More on Kirtsaeng v John Wiley & Sons.) [read post]
