Search for: "In Interest of LJ"
Results 841 - 860
of 980
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
24 Jan 2013, 4:45 pm
Where either joint tenant wishes to terminate their interest in a tenancy they must terminate the full tenancy as in (92) above. 101. [read post]
24 May 2011, 10:55 pm
This tribunal was not satisfied that removal of AP to Trinidad would involve a disproportionate interference with his right to a private and family life or the rights of other members of his family, when set against the interests of the prevention of crime and protection of the rights and freedom of others. [read post]
24 Feb 2019, 4:23 pm
Butt v Secretary of State for the Home Department, heard 17 October 2018 (Underhill V-P, Sharp LJ and Sir Rupert Jackson). [read post]
8 Jul 2010, 10:46 pm
As Laws LJ said in Amare v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2005] EWCA Civ 1600, [2006] Imm AR 217 para 31: “The Convention is not there to safeguard or protect potentially affected persons from having to live in regimes where pluralist liberal values are less respected, even much less respected, than they are here. [read post]
12 May 2019, 4:36 pm
Judgments The following reserved judgments after public hearings in media law cases are outstanding: Butt v Secretary of State for the Home Department, heard 17 October 2018 (Underhill V-P, Sharp LJ and Sir Rupert Jackson). [read post]
11 Oct 2010, 2:51 am
The PCC Watch blog has an interesting post under the title “Why doesn’t the PCC make reference to legal cases? [read post]
11 Nov 2014, 3:55 am
” [1] It was therefore held at first instance that AIB could only recover under the second of the two options above and therefore AIB was awarded equitable compensation amounting to a total (with interest) of £323,501.38. [read post]
24 Mar 2019, 5:08 pm
Butt v Secretary of State for the Home Department, heard 17 October 2018 (Underhill V-P, Sharp LJ and Sir Rupert Jackson). [read post]
5 Oct 2022, 8:59 am
Two are “in individual cases for any of the law enforcement purposes” or “in individual cases for a legal purpose”—unless the public interest in the transfer is outweighed by a data subject’s fundamental rights and freedoms. [read post]
19 Jul 2012, 6:43 am
Neuberger LJ noted that “… [i]t now applies to empty and substantially commercial buildings, even if nobody recently lived there or is even intending to live there… and it is open to tenants to enfranchise many properties at the same time, even if they do not live in any of [read post]
11 Jul 2008, 12:49 pm
In Tom's latest work on punitive damages, which is forthcoming in Yale LJ, and is available in draft form on SSRN now, he argues that this would and should be an available option (constitutionally speaking) so long as state legislatures or courts said they were not engaged in awarding "punitive damages," which is to say, so long as language of condemnation or language of punishment is not explicitly used. [read post]
26 Mar 2019, 8:09 am
As Gillen LJ said, it would be extraordinary if the Prime Minister had not been consulted. [read post]
18 Jul 2019, 2:43 am
The consequences of breach do not affect the parties alone, but also cargo interests and subcharterers, as well as regulatory issues, ports and flags. [read post]
17 Mar 2019, 5:35 pm
Butt v Secretary of State for the Home Department, heard 17 October 2018 (Underhill V-P, Sharp LJ and Sir Rupert Jackson). [read post]
24 Nov 2019, 4:08 pm
The judges, Davis LJ and Warby J, released a short summary of their decision [pdf] – with a full judgment to follow later. [read post]
21 Apr 2010, 3:11 am
And her submissions under Article 6(1) failed because the Court found that even if the withdrawal of legal aid constituted a restriction on her right of access to court, the reason for the refusal – namely that the cost of funding the case would outweigh any likely award for damages – is expressly contemplated in the Legal Aid Act 1988 and was undoubtedly intended to meet the legitimate concern that, in the absence of any point of public interest, public money should only be… [read post]
2 Jun 2015, 10:45 am
The arbitrators published their award ordering Bremer to pay Soules $65,129 plus interest. [read post]
8 Mar 2010, 6:57 am
But, it is interesting to note that even the companies and especially private and closely held Public Companies do neglect the compliance of the provisions of the Act and we are seeing all these cases. [read post]
20 Jan 2019, 4:05 pm
Butt v Secretary of State for the Home Department, heard 17 October 2018 (Underhill V-P, Sharp LJ and Sir Rupert Jackson). [read post]
7 Aug 2015, 1:30 am
Maurice Kay LJ in effect held that only sufficiently “co-operative” and “credible” children could benefit from the Rashid/ R(S): the now infamous “hypothetical spectrum”. [read post]
