Search for: "Herring v. Commissioner"
Results 961 - 980
of 3,546
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
9 Apr 2010, 4:13 am
Last month, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees submitted a third-party written intervention to the European Court of Human Rights in the case of Hirsi and Others v. [read post]
30 Jan 2008, 6:30 am
Callahan v. [read post]
1 Jul 2011, 12:22 am
Astrue is Mercedes Harrison's second attempt at receiving Title II benefits, in a previous hearing the Commissioner and district court found her capable of working. [read post]
26 Jul 2009, 7:06 am
In Johnson v. [read post]
19 Apr 2007, 4:47 pm
Commissioner, S.C. [read post]
6 Jun 2022, 3:00 am
On Wednesday 8th June, the Court will hear Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs v NHS Lothian Health Board. [read post]
25 Apr 2022, 5:25 am
The first is Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs v Coal Staff Superannuation Scheme Trustees Ltd and will consider the UK tax treatment of “manufactured overseas dividends”. [read post]
3 Feb 2015, 12:22 pm
We ask the tough questions: Is her title an elaborate hoax or is she the busiest woman on the planet? [read post]
6 Dec 2021, 3:57 am
A recent Tax Court case, McNulty v. [read post]
5 May 2011, 3:41 am
Discipline penaltiesNicastro v Safir, App. [read post]
26 Aug 2014, 7:01 am
Commissioner of Indiana Dep't of Rev., Baskin v. [read post]
12 Jan 2010, 7:00 am
" Her services said they would analyse the details and request more specific information if necessary. [read post]
23 Aug 2011, 1:14 pm
While this seems like a simple "yes" or "no" question, the Eight Circuit's recent ruling in Collins v. [read post]
10 Oct 2022, 1:00 am
The following Supreme Court judgments remain outstanding: (As of 12/10/22) The Law Debenture Trust Corporation plc v Ukraine (Represented by the Minister of Finance of Ukraine acting upon the instructions of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine) Nos. 2 and 3, heard 9-12 December 2019 East of England Ambulance Service NHS Trust v Flowers and Ors, heard 22 June 2021 Guest and another v Guest heard 3rd December 2021 Fearn and others v Board of Trustees… [read post]
11 Jul 2022, 3:07 am
The following Supreme Court judgments remain outstanding: (As of 6/7/22) The Law Debenture Trust Corporation plc v Ukraine (Represented by the Minister of Finance of Ukraine acting upon the instructions of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine) Nos. 2 and 3, heard 9-12 December 2019 BTI 2014 LLC v Sequana SA and Ors, heard 4 May 2021 East of England Ambulance Service NHS Trust v Flowers and Ors, heard 22 June 2021 Harpur Trust v Brazel, heard… [read post]
14 Mar 2022, 2:00 am
The following Supreme Court judgments remain outstanding: (As of 16/3/22) The Law Debenture Trust Corporation plc v Ukraine (Represented by the Minister of Finance of Ukraine acting upon the instructions of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine) Nos. 2 and 3, heard 9-12 December 2019 BTI 2014 LLC v Sequana SA and Ors, heard 4 May 2021 East of England Ambulance Service NHS Trust v Flowers and Ors, heard 22 June 2021 Basfar v Wong, heard 13th-14th October … [read post]
9 May 2022, 3:45 am
On Wednesday 11th May, the Court will hand down judgment in Zipvit Ltd v Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs (No 2), on appeal from [2020] UKSC 15. [read post]
29 Feb 2016, 9:10 am
This was the standard that had been applied in Burnip, and was said to find further support in the Supreme Court’s decision in Humphreys v Revenue and Customs Commissioners. [read post]
4 Jul 2022, 1:00 am
The following Supreme Court judgments remain outstanding: (As of 6/7/22) The Law Debenture Trust Corporation plc v Ukraine (Represented by the Minister of Finance of Ukraine acting upon the instructions of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine) Nos. 2 and 3, heard 9-12 December 2019 BTI 2014 LLC v Sequana SA and Ors, heard 4 May 2021 East of England Ambulance Service NHS Trust v Flowers and Ors, heard 22 June 2021 Harpur Trust v Brazel, heard… [read post]
23 Dec 2011, 11:18 am
Genlyte Thomas Group, LLC (Workers' compensation; whether Connecticut law applied to claim for benefits; "The plaintiff...appeals from the decision of the workers’ compensation review board (board) affirming the decision of the workers’ compensation commissioner for the seventh district (commissioner), which concluded that Connecticut law did not apply to her claim for workers’ compensation benefits.") [read post]
