Search for: "State v Reed"
Results 981 - 1000
of 2,347
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
6 Dec 2016, 1:45 am
Lord Pannick QC says it is no answer for the Government to say that the long title to the 1972 Act “says nothing about withdrawal“. 16:04: Lord Pannick QC refers to the case of Robinson v Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, which he submits supports a “flexible response” to constitutional developments. [read post]
2 Dec 2016, 11:00 am
It is difficult to conceive of a case that better fits this description than R (Miller & Anor) v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union. [read post]
1 Dec 2016, 5:00 am
In its recent decision in the case of Toro v. [read post]
15 Nov 2016, 7:38 am
Or consider Reed v. [read post]
14 Nov 2016, 6:51 am
In last year, Sofa Works v. [read post]
14 Nov 2016, 1:00 am
The panel will be Lord Neuberger, Lord Kerr and Lord Reed. [read post]
9 Nov 2016, 3:04 am
That wasn’t similar to the ordinance, nor was the ordinance in Reed v. [read post]
2 Nov 2016, 1:26 pm
The United States Supreme Court’s 2014 opinion in a patent case, Octane Fitness, LLC v. [read post]
2 Nov 2016, 1:26 pm
The United States Supreme Court’s 2014 opinion in a patent case, Octane Fitness, LLC v. [read post]
31 Oct 2016, 7:07 am
The state appellate court court agreed, holding that the Internet disclosure provision was unconstitutional both on its face and as applied to defendant, but the Illinois Supreme Court overturned that decision and upheld the statute.* * This case is a close cousin of the case (North Carolina v. [read post]
31 Oct 2016, 5:50 am
People v. [read post]
27 Oct 2016, 4:05 pm
Although it is correct to say that the man had been born in Madeira (not mainland Portugal where he now appears to be), the sentence above is misleading since it does not mention that the man had lived in the South West for 50 years (as stated in the judgment). [read post]
23 Oct 2016, 3:54 pm
And Article V enables the states, by “the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States,” to require Congress to call a Constitutional Convention. [read post]
21 Oct 2016, 12:51 pm
The best indication of the joint dissent’s misunderstanding of the Framers’ scheme is its treatment of Justice Story’s landmark 1820 opinion in a piracy case, United States v. [read post]
21 Oct 2016, 6:39 am
” Since 1776, the United States has authorized the use of military tribunals for trying espionage and aiding the enemy, neither of which are offenses against international law. [read post]
20 Oct 2016, 7:44 am
As stated by the Supreme Court in Hudson v. [read post]
20 Oct 2016, 7:44 am
As stated by the Supreme Court in Hudson v. [read post]
17 Oct 2016, 1:50 am
R (Johnson) v Secretary of State for the Home Department. [read post]
10 Oct 2016, 7:41 am
In Reed v. [read post]
