Search for: "Hale v. Hale"
Results 1081 - 1100
of 1,470
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
14 Oct 2009, 5:30 am
Kaufman v. [read post]
26 Aug 2013, 6:36 am
In Gideon v. [read post]
18 Dec 2023, 4:00 am
Thirty years before Dobbs, the Supreme Court decided Planned Parenthood v. [read post]
11 Sep 2015, 1:21 pm
Powell, Hale, Commons, Cohen, and Dewey.All very well, but what impact does this “historicist turn” have on conventional versions of the living Constitution as well as the standard debate between this point of view and originalism? [read post]
28 Oct 2020, 3:01 am
In that context, the Ninth Circuit's FTC v. [read post]
18 Apr 2018, 8:07 pm
J.A. 1–55 (Final Written Decision,Wangs Alliance Corp. v. [read post]
4 Mar 2016, 2:01 pm
Here’s a nice personal jurisdiction decision (TV Azteca v. [read post]
19 Aug 2022, 6:59 am
., Inc. v. [read post]
15 Jun 2023, 3:51 pm
ShareIn Smith v. [read post]
16 Nov 2021, 12:41 pm
(This latter was disposed of quickly on the basis that Lady Hale’s comments in Nzolameso v City of Westminster [2015] UKSC 22; [2015] HLR 2 on procurement policies were obiter reccomendations, rather than a requirement.) [read post]
31 May 2009, 10:24 am
Hale LJ and Brooke LJ in Adan agreed that the constitution and procedures of the body to whom reviews were contracted out would be relevant to judging compliance with Art 6. [read post]
19 Oct 2010, 11:18 am
I would also point to certain passages of Austin v Southwark in the Supreme Court to the effect that the TT was a judicial disaster that should not have happened, and that mesne profits at the level of rent, without the corresponding repairing obligation, were strongly arguable as unfair (see Baroness Hale at 54). [read post]
1 Dec 2016, 4:21 am
Yesterday, the court heard oral argument in Jennings v. [read post]
13 Nov 2019, 4:36 pm
” (Rhodes v OPO [76]). [read post]
23 Dec 2009, 10:00 am
The pressing justification in this case was the mere effect of peer pressure on other students (B Hale at para. 98). [read post]
5 Nov 2019, 3:15 am
Handing down its judgment on 30 October 2019, the Supreme Court unanimously dismissed the appeal, with Lady Hale stating that this was a case “bristling with simplicity”. [read post]
28 May 2015, 3:15 pm
In Knight v. [read post]
31 Aug 2014, 1:05 pm
They referenced a statement by the Supreme Court in a more recent case earlier this year in Walden v. [read post]
10 Feb 2012, 1:45 am
Lord Hope, in Ravat at 25, noted the complaint of the tribunal below that little appellate guidance had been provided and rather optimistically suggested that the judgment of Lady Hale in Duncombe v Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families (No 2) [2011] UKSC 36; [2011] ICR 1213 had provided clarity when she said, at [8], that one need not torture cases to fit the existing categories. [read post]
23 Oct 2014, 12:27 pm
, Hale v. [read post]
