Search for: "Mann v. Mann"
Results 981 - 1000
of 1,399
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
3 Mar 2012, 11:32 am
This week, the Texas Supreme Court denied Denbury Green Pipeline's motion for rehearing in Texas Rice Land Partners v. [read post]
2 Mar 2012, 2:02 am
Useful reading: On Sedley v Sumption, here’s Sumption’s FA Mann lecture from last year: Sedley’s LRB article in response Whigs and Hunters. [read post]
1 Mar 2012, 4:28 pm
Mann, W. [read post]
29 Feb 2012, 2:06 pm
§ 2518(5); Scott v. [read post]
28 Feb 2012, 1:13 pm
Regan and an attorney for King’s estate, Lawrence Mann of Bethesda, Md. [read post]
27 Feb 2012, 12:38 pm
Supreme Court's ruling in Maples v. [read post]
25 Feb 2012, 7:06 am
Mann. [read post]
23 Feb 2012, 7:34 am
Ronald Mann reports on Tuesday’s arguments in Freeman v. [read post]
22 Feb 2012, 11:22 am
Hurley and Moore v Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills [2012] EWHC 201- read judgment This judgment, the latest in an expanding list of decisions on challenges to the Coalition government’s spending cuts, is an interesting example of judicial restraint and deference to the government on issues of macro-policy, at a time when the extent of judicial intervention into political decision-making is the subject of much debate in the legal profession and academia, thanks… [read post]
21 Feb 2012, 6:54 am
In Freeman v. [read post]
20 Feb 2012, 9:51 pm
Ronald Mann previewed the case. [read post]
15 Feb 2012, 3:56 am
On 1 February 2012, in their judgment in the case of Coogan and Phillips v NGN and Mulcaire ([2012] EWCA Civ 48) the Court of Appeal (Lord Judge, Lord Neuberger and Maurice Kay LJ) unanimously upheld the rulings of Mann J and Vos J that, as a result of the operation of section 72 of the Senior Courts Act 1981, Mr Mulcaire was not entitled to rely on his privilege against self-incrimination in refusing to answer questions put to him by the two claimants. [read post]
13 Feb 2012, 1:30 am
Newly resolved cases include: Nathaniel Rothschild v The Observer (Clause 1) 10/02/2012; A man v Grimsby Evening Telegraph (Clause 1) 08/02/2012; A woman v Hinckley Times (Clause 1) 08/02/2012; Ellen Yianni v Daily Mail (Clause 1) 08/02/2012; Nathalie Dye v Daily Mail (Clause 1 and 5) 08/02/2012; Nathalie Dye v The Sun (Clause 1 and 5) 08/02/2012. [read post]
12 Feb 2012, 12:04 pm
In Whited v. [read post]
9 Feb 2012, 10:39 am
Therefore, the MR concluded (at para 83): Accordingly, I would dismiss these appeals, as: i) Much of the information on the voicemail messages of the claimants which have been intercepted by Mr Mulcaire is likely to have been 'commercial information or other intellectual property' within section 72(5); ii) Although some of the information was not 'commercial information or other intellectual property', and, in Ms Phillips's case, the confidence may have been that of her… [read post]
2 Feb 2012, 1:19 am
The Court (Lord Judge, Lord Neuberger and Maurice Kay LJ) unanimously upheld the rulings of Mann J and Vos J that, as a result of the operation of section 72 of the Senior Courts Act 1981, Mr Mulcaire was not entitled to rely on his privilege against self-incrimination (‘PSI’).” Full story UK Human Rights Blog, 1st February 2012 Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com [read post]
1 Feb 2012, 8:41 am
On 17 November 2010, Mann J held that Mr Mulcaire was not entitled to rely on the PSI ([2010] EWHC 2952 (Ch)). [read post]
1 Feb 2012, 6:18 am
On 17 November 2010, Mann J held that Mr Mulcaire was not entitled to rely on the PSI ([2010] EWHC 2952 (Ch)). [read post]
31 Jan 2012, 2:42 am
The Court of Appeal for England and Wales has just given judgment in Specsavers International Healthcare Ltd, Specsavers BV, Specsavers Optical Group Ltd and Specsavers Optical Superstores Ltd v Asda Stores Ltd [2012] EWCA Civ 24. [read post]
30 Jan 2012, 4:15 pm
In Balkin's case, it's the Thirteenth amendment and "the (in)famous 1830 case of State v. [read post]
