Search for: "State v. Arden"
Results 81 - 100
of 231
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
Case Comment: R (ZH and CN) v London Borough of Newham and London Borough of Lewisham [2014] UKSC 62
14 May 2015, 1:59 am
In Hounslow LBC v Powell; Leeds CC v Hall; Birmingham CC v Frisby [2011] UKSC 8; [2011] 2 AC 18; [2011] HLR 23, the decision in Pinnock was held to be of general application whenever a public authority seek possession of a property that constitutes a person’s home. [read post]
28 Dec 2014, 4:12 pm
These were questions in Lawal & Anor v Circle 33 Housing Trust [2014] EWCA Civ 1514. [read post]
8 May 2012, 6:42 am
Accordingly, the High Court was correct in following Re Eurofood to hold that the presumption could be rebutted only by factors that were both objective and ascertainable by third parties. (2) (Arden LJ dissenting) allowing the U.S. [read post]
15 Apr 2014, 9:59 am
The post Case Comment – Aintree University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust v James [2013] UKSC 67 appeared first on UKSCBlog. [read post]
29 Jan 2020, 2:30 am
Lady Arden agreed the appeal should be allowed but for different reasons. [read post]
31 May 2012, 3:36 am
Arden LJ also disagreed with Kitchin J’s position on the defence under article 81 of the EC Treaty. [read post]
16 Aug 2011, 3:48 pm
West Kent Housing Association v Haycraft [2011] EWCA Civ 992 (Not on Bailii. [read post]
16 Aug 2011, 3:48 pm
West Kent Housing Association v Haycraft [2011] EWCA Civ 992 (Not on Bailii. [read post]
18 Apr 2019, 2:22 am
The Supreme Court Lady Hale, Lord Wilson, Lady Black, Lord Lloyd-Jones and Lady Arden dismissed the appeal on both points. [read post]
13 Nov 2015, 2:00 am
She stated that “the CMA could rationally take the view that, even though SeaFrance had been placed in liquidation, and even though its employees have been declared redundant, GET/SCOP acquired its business. [read post]
23 Aug 2011, 2:56 pm
Arden * Three Gripers Get Disadvantageous Jurisdictional Appellate Rulings in Defamation Cases * Ripoff Report Sues Blogger, Loses on Jurisdictional Grounds--Xcentric Ventures v. [read post]
22 May 2009, 4:10 am
The parties should also consider the guidance given by Arden LJ in Horvath v Secretary of State for Environment [2007] EWCA Civ 620 at [80]. [read post]
17 Sep 2019, 1:26 am
He says Parliament may be prorogued for a number of purposes. 14:26: Lord Reed and Lady Arden question Lord Keen QC regarding procedural steps the Government would take in the event that prorogation is declared unlawful by the Court. 14:21: Lord Keen QC submits that “in any view” part 4 of the Interlocuter (the Inner Court’s order) must be recalled. 14:19 Lord Keen QC argues that in so far as the Inner House sought to declare the prorogation unlawful, he will take no issue… [read post]
16 Jul 2010, 1:15 am
Hall & Ors v Mayor of London (On Behalf of the Greater London Authority) [2010] EWCA Civ 817 (16 July 2010) – read judgment The Mayor of London has won a court order to evict a camp of protesters from Parliament Square, with the Court of Appeal upholding a decision of the High Court stating that the Mayor’s response to the protest was proportionate and not a breach of the protesters’ human rights. [read post]
25 Oct 2016, 1:22 am
The latter part of the presentation covered recent cases on medicines regulation, focussing on R(Roche Registration Ltd) v Secretary of State for Health [2015] EWCA Civ 1311 (although this English Court of Appeal decision was handed down on 21 December 2015, it may have escaped your radar due to seasonal festivities and/or the mad rush to tie up loose ends before the Christmas vacation...) [read post]
20 May 2015, 3:30 am
They carefully considered the historical context of the decision in Wilkinson v Downton. [read post]
18 Sep 2019, 1:18 am
1538: Aidan O’Neill QC submits that the role of this court is to rebalance the constitution. 1530: Aidan O’Neill QC refers to the decision in Padfield v Minister of Agriculture at page 1061 of the decision. [read post]
18 Mar 2006, 1:48 am
In Evans v. [read post]
5 Aug 2014, 10:14 am
Thus, in R (Elias) v Secretary of State for Defence [2006] 1 WLR 3213 para 165 provides that in discrimination cases there should be a structured approach to the question of justification: “First, is the objective sufficiently important to justify limiting a fundamental right? [read post]
2 Aug 2016, 6:58 am
On 16 December 2015, the Supreme Court handed down judgment in Société Coopérative de Production SeaFrance SA v The Competition and Markets Authority. [read post]
