Search for: "Human v. State"
Results 901 - 920
of 19,077
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
16 Apr 2008, 8:03 am
Kennedy v. [read post]
17 Jan 2017, 7:27 pm
L.W. v. [read post]
21 Sep 2023, 10:34 am
The Supreme Court’s 2014 decision in Alice v. [read post]
23 Jun 2011, 3:33 pm
EMA, concerning the constitutionality of state regulation of violent video games, and McComish v. [read post]
2 Feb 2023, 1:11 am
Otherwise, procedural limits for human rights challenges would lose their preclusive effect. [read post]
25 Jun 2015, 10:04 am
United States v. [read post]
20 Oct 2017, 6:15 am
" The State Court of Appeals said that in Albunio v. [read post]
15 Apr 2015, 9:29 pm
Mitze v. [read post]
25 Jun 2017, 9:30 pm
The high court’s decision in Barron v. [read post]
28 Aug 2012, 3:00 am
Krolik and others v Polish Judicial Authorities: [2012] EWHC 2357 (Admin); [2012] WLR (D) 254 “In the light of the presumption that Poland, as a member state of the Council of Europe, was able and willing to fulfil its obligations under the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, in the absence of clear, cogent and compelling evidence to the contrary, a strict approach would in future be adopted in deciding appeals… [read post]
21 Mar 2015, 4:13 am
See Bey v. [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]
10 Aug 2012, 7:10 pm
Alcon v. [read post]
28 Jun 2014, 5:25 pm
On 18 June 2014 the Supreme Court handed down judgment in R (T) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2014] UKSC 35. [read post]
28 Aug 2024, 4:28 pm
ARTICLE 19 together with the Human Rights Centre of Ghent University, also submitted a third-party intervention to the ECtHR insisting on the difference between prohibitions on blasphemy and insult of a religion (which are not allowed under international human rights law) and incitement to hatred, hostility and violence (which States are obliged to prohibit and prosecute under international human rights law). [read post]
8 Jun 2009, 10:50 am
The United States Supreme Court ruled today in Caperton v. [read post]
29 May 2023, 10:32 am
United States v. [read post]
22 Jul 2015, 2:34 am
The UK Supreme Court today handed down judgment in the case of Coventry v Lawrence ([2015] UKSC 50) [pdf]. [read post]
22 Oct 2013, 10:34 am
They provide the normative and operational standard for the implementation of the United Nations “Protect, Respect and Remedy” Framework for business and human rights structured around three pillars:[3]• The State duty to protect against human rights abuses by third parties, including business enterprises, through policies, regulation and adjudication. [read post]
10 Feb 2015, 6:10 am
Initially, in State v. [read post]
