Search for: "In Interest of LJ" Results 101 - 120 of 980
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
26 Jun 2015, 12:30 am
 Floyd LJ has roundly rejected Arnold J's reasoning, stating:58.The difficulty I feel with endorsing this reasoning is as follows. [read post]
25 Mar 2009, 10:33 am
As some of you saw on Co-Op the other day, there's an unusual exchange going on in the pages of the Georgetown LJ this month. [read post]
16 Nov 2016, 3:44 am
 The point arises again in Idenix v Gilead and was the subject of some obiter comments by Kitchin LJ. [read post]
13 Nov 2012, 2:46 am by Dave
  I know that the common intention constructive trust is really interesting – empirically as well as in law – but you can’t just jump straight in. [read post]
13 Nov 2012, 2:46 am by Dave
  I know that the common intention constructive trust is really interesting – empirically as well as in law – but you can’t just jump straight in. [read post]
1 May 2012, 4:00 am by Jill Murray, Olswang.
  However, he stated there was a “strong public interest in this statutory regime”. [read post]
6 Jun 2010, 2:39 am by INFORRM
Rimer LJ cast serious doubt as to whether the rule is appropriate in libel cases: “If the single meaning rule does achieve a fair balance in defamation law between the parties’ competing interests, that would appear to be the result of luck rather than judgment; and how the measure of such claimed fairness might be assessed may anyway be questionable. [read post]
9 Apr 2010, 7:31 pm by INFORRM
  Buxton LJ gave a concurring judgment and Tuckey LJ agreed with both. [read post]
13 Apr 2011, 8:14 am by Francis Davey
In paragraph 80, Arden LJ leaves open the possibility of an article 8 challenge if any future claim for possession were made. [read post]
16 Oct 2010, 6:54 pm by Jim Harper
” (Mine is quite a bit more accessible than this new book, so if you’re interested in the field, you might want to start there.) [read post]
4 Jun 2007, 6:04 pm
If this sounds like something you would be interested in, please stop by, give us your thoughts, and sign up for announcements! [read post]
23 Dec 2011, 12:29 am by Francis Davey
On Wednesday Stanley Burnton LJ refused permission.What is interesting is that he made it quite clear that, even though this was a second appeal, if Bean J had made his decision following the a trial of the claim, the Lord Justice would have given permission regardless of the outcome. [read post]
7 Apr 2015, 1:39 am by Lucy Hayes, Olswang LLP
It is interesting, therefore, that where the dissenting judges differed from the majority was not on a question of law but on the application of that law to the facts of the case. [read post]
29 Jun 2012, 10:56 am by Carlee Toth
The State’s refusal to open the ramps, therefore, is not the reflection of some law or regulatory impulse but of the State’s proprietary interest in ensuring the performance of a contract. [read post]
4 Jun 2009, 4:30 am
Jackson LJ, and those who have assisted in its writing, are to be congratulated on their work. [read post]
13 Aug 2010, 1:44 pm by charonqc
On this quantum issue Kennedy LJ agreed with him (at p 1429) and Schiemann LJ (at p 1447) expressed no opinion. [read post]