Search for: "Pounds v. United States" Results 1081 - 1100 of 1,470
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
29 Dec 2011, 4:54 pm by INFORRM
Max Mosley went to the European Court of Human Rights with his application against the United Kingdom. [read post]
29 Dec 2011, 1:50 am by Rosalind English
The Queen on the application of Naik v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2011] EWCA Civ 1546 – read judgment The Court of Appeal has confirmed that the exclusion of an Indian Muslim public speaker  from the United Kingdom after making statements which breached the Home Office’s “unacceptable behaviours policy” was lawful,  and that any interference with his rights was justified. [read post]
24 Dec 2011, 9:25 am
The Constitution Bench of this Court in Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia and Others v. [read post]
21 Dec 2011, 4:22 am by INFORRM
The Judge said the allegation was “calculated to put at risk Mr Berezovsky’s refugee status and leave to remain in the United Kingdom” and awarded Mr Berezovsky £150,000 in damages ([2010] EWHC 476 (QB)). [read post]
19 Dec 2011, 4:03 pm by INFORRM
  For over 200 years, not only in the United States but also in England, most people are deeply suspicious of any order of that kind. [read post]
17 Dec 2011, 8:42 am by Dave
Three decisions of the Administrative Appeals Chamber of the Upper Tribunal on HB matters stand out: SS v North East Lincolnshire Council (HB) [2011] UKUT 300 (AAC); MB v Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea (HB) [2011] UKUT 321 (AAC); MR v Bournemouth Borough Council (HB) [2011] UKUT 284 (AAC). [read post]
17 Dec 2011, 8:42 am by Dave
Three decisions of the Administrative Appeals Chamber of the Upper Tribunal on HB matters stand out: SS v North East Lincolnshire Council (HB) [2011] UKUT 300 (AAC); MB v Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea (HB) [2011] UKUT 321 (AAC); MR v Bournemouth Borough Council (HB) [2011] UKUT 284 (AAC). [read post]
15 Dec 2011, 12:22 am by Kevin LaCroix
 However, last year, in an abrupt reversal, the United States Supreme Court dramatically limited the extraterritorial application of U.S. securities laws in Morrison v. [read post]
8 Dec 2011, 1:34 pm by SJM
M in evidence described the state of the property as disgusting: white goods and kitchen units were damaged, there were maggots in the wheelie bins, the shower room contained excrement and the carpets smelled of urine. [read post]
8 Dec 2011, 1:34 pm by SJM
M in evidence described the state of the property as disgusting: white goods and kitchen units were damaged, there were maggots in the wheelie bins, the shower room contained excrement and the carpets smelled of urine. [read post]
5 Dec 2011, 7:04 am by Frank O'Donnell, Clean Air Watch
“This proposal of an undefined design standard as BACT, rather than a numerical emission limit, does not satisfy the definition of BACT” under the Clean Air Act or Utah's state implementation plan, EPA said.The final permit issued to PacifiCorp in May limited the plant's annual greenhouse gas emissions to 950 pounds per megawatt-hour.Gray said the efficiency requirements in the proposed permit were equivalent of the eventual numeric emissions limit, but Utah… [read post]
2 Dec 2011, 4:02 am by Libby Payne, Olswang LLP
Current state of the law The House of Lords decision in Lawson v Serco Ltd [2006] ICR 250 is the leading case in this area. [read post]
27 Nov 2011, 3:59 am by INFORRM
   In England and any other common law jurisdiction (outside the United States), the damages would, at most have been in the low tens of thousands of pounds. [read post]
19 Nov 2011, 8:54 am by INFORRM
  Even in the United States figures produced by freedom of expression NGO Article 19 the average libel damages award is US$471,221. [read post]
11 Nov 2011, 10:00 am by admin
Boren and one in 1996, United States v. [read post]
10 Nov 2011, 3:54 am by Kirsten Sjvoll, Matrix Chambers
It is established in Strasbourg and domestic jurisprudence that in certain “well-defined circumstances” art 2 will impose “a positive obligation on [state] authorities to take preventative operational measure” to protect the life of an individual (Osman v UK (2009) 29 EHRR 245 at 115). [read post]