Search for: "Lord v. State"
Results 1021 - 1040
of 3,587
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
30 Oct 2017, 2:00 am
R (HC) v Secretary of State for Works and Pensions & Ors, heard 21-22 Jun 2017. [read post]
20 Nov 2011, 4:20 pm
Lord Justice Leveson warned the press that he would be monitoring coverage for adverse coverage of Inquiry witnesses. [read post]
5 Jan 2015, 2:23 am
This was the situation until the decision in Metropolitan Bank v Heiron, which was then followed by Lister & Co v Stubbs. [read post]
10 Jul 2017, 1:00 am
R (UNISON) v Lord Chancellor, heard 27-28 Mar 2017. [read post]
20 Nov 2016, 6:36 pm
In Citicorp v Castex an interpretation clause in the agreement stated "Headings shall be ignored in construing this Trust Deed. [read post]
4 Nov 2015, 2:30 am
In delivering the lead judgment Lord Clarke stated that the critical question in this case of unjust enrichment was whether the appellant was enriched by the banks expense. [read post]
12 Oct 2020, 1:00 am
The proposed panel for hand down is Lord Reed, Lord Lloyd-Jones, Lord Kitchin, Lord Hamblen, and Lord Burrows. [read post]
12 Apr 2011, 5:00 pm
DONE at the city of Washington this sixth day of May in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred seventy-six and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundredth. [read post]
17 Dec 2008, 11:54 am
Lord (Wis. 2006) 723 N.W.2d 425; see also People v. [read post]
27 Jun 2016, 3:44 am
It stated the report was to be provided to the lenders, Airtours was only to be provided with a copy which could be redacted. [read post]
28 Apr 2015, 2:43 am
The dissent is notable, if only for the fact the President of the court, Lord Neuberger, and Lord Sumption are the two dissenters. [read post]
17 Jun 2019, 1:00 am
Patel v Secretary of State for the Home Department; Secretary of State for the Home Department v Shah, heard 7 May 2019. [read post]
20 Jan 2015, 3:41 am
Lady Hale, with the concurrence of Lord Wilson, Lord Reed, Lord Hughes and Lord Hodge, gave a decision based squarely on the language of the statute, of which the Court adopted a precise and tailored reading. [read post]
14 Nov 2014, 8:45 am
In R (Lord Carlile of Berriew QC & Ors) v SSHD; the Court ruled by a 4-1 majority that the executive’s decision to bar Mrs Rajavi’s admission into the UK on grounds that it would not be conducive to the public good was rational and Secretary of State had not underrated the appellants’ ECHR, art 10 rights or overstated the risk. [read post]
13 May 2015, 2:59 am
In giving the leading judgment Lord Neuberger stated that courts in the UK have consistently held that it is necessary for a claimant to have actual goodwill, in the sense of a customer base, in this jurisdiction before it can satisfy the requirement for the law of passing off. [read post]
25 May 2012, 5:35 am
Judgment In this judgment, after setting out the background Tugendhat J considered submissions made as to his statement in his earlier judgment that “trial with a jury will generally be ordered as a matter of discretion, in particular where the state, or a public authority, is a defendant” [35] He accepted that, in the light of cases such as H v Ministry of Defence ([1991] QB 103) and Racz v Home Office ([1994] 2 AC 45) he should have omitted the word… [read post]
13 Oct 2011, 2:15 am
But in this connection, let us turn to the case of Hirst v United Kingdom No2 (the prisoner voting case). [read post]
30 Nov 2010, 2:26 am
CMEC appealed.In the Court of Appeal Lord Justice Etherton found (at paragraph 50) that the Judge had been wrong to conclude that the Commission was a creditor entitled to participate in, and that it was bound by, the IVA. [read post]
29 Dec 2020, 4:05 pm
Its existence, however, was accepted by Lords Steyn and Hope in Berezovsky v Michaels. [read post]
15 Jun 2016, 2:26 am
Lord Neuberger and Lady Hale also stated that even if the court had been able to find the possession order disproportionate to her rights under art 8, the appellant could not assume that this would have led to the order being refused. [read post]
