Search for: "State v. London" Results 81 - 100 of 4,097
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
28 Aug 2023, 10:50 am by Giles Peaker
Nonetheless, judicial acknowledgement that this is the state we are in, where being shipped from London to Walsall is pretty much inevitable for single parent families is profoundly depressing. [read post]
23 Aug 2023, 7:45 pm
Richard and Mary Eshelman Faculty Scholar; Professor of Law and International Affairs; Pennsylvania State University | 239 Lewis Katz Building, University Park, PA 16802 1.814.863.3640 (direct) || lcb11@psu.edu First I want to thank Marcelo Thompson, Han Zhu, and Dean Fu Hualing, and all those who organized this workshop. [read post]
  This was the case in R v Rogers [2014] EWCA Crim 1680, where there was no act of money laundering in England but it was sufficient that the underlying fraud generating the criminal property took place in England and there were English victims. [read post]
16 Aug 2023, 4:55 pm by INFORRM
The case is Esper v NHS North West London Integrated Care Board [2023] EWCOP 29; [2023] WLR(D) 300, and is a decision of Mr Justice Poole. [read post]
14 Aug 2023, 2:34 pm by Giles Peaker
Still not a binding precedent, but of persuasive value (and will be followed in the London courts). [read post]
6 Aug 2023, 10:00 pm by Merpel McKitten
To mark this milestone, we organized an event in London in June 2023 [Katreports here, here, here and here] and Kats Hayleigh and Eleonora put together a collection of chapters authored by current and past IPKat Team Members, as well as some eminent Katfriends. [read post]
5 Aug 2023, 3:00 am by Chip Merlin
 My dad and Uncle Roy kept expanding the firm until we had 12 offices around the United States, an office in Puerto Rico, and an affiliate in London. [read post]
31 Jul 2023, 7:55 am by JURIST Staff
The Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case titled Habib Ullah Energy Limited and another v. [read post]
26 Jul 2023, 5:50 am by Tobias Lutzi
The Supreme Court can, like previously the House of Lords, depart from precedent in line with the Practice Statement [1966] 1 WLR 1234 (see Austin v Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Southwark [2010] UKSC 28, at [25]), but the Supreme Court is very hesitant to do so in order to maintain legal certainty and predictability. [read post]
24 Jul 2023, 1:44 am by Matrix Legal Support Service
R (on the application of Afzal) v Secretary of State for the Home Department, heard 7th June 2023. [read post]
23 Jul 2023, 11:10 am by Giles Peaker
As per Schon v London Borough of Camden (1986) 18 HLR 341, the test for being a residential occupier was the same as under Rent Act 1977. [read post]
18 Jul 2023, 1:59 am by Matrix Law
R (on the application of Afzal) v Secretary of State for the Home Department, heard 7th June 2023. [read post]