Search for: "STATE v. LEWIS" Results 101 - 120 of 4,057
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
4 Dec 2023, 2:21 am by INFORRM
On 27 November 2023, HHJ Lewis dismissed the defendant’s application for summary judgement in the case of Iqbal v Geo TV Limited [2023] EWHC 3024 (KB). [read post]
3 Dec 2023, 12:36 pm by Giles Peaker
Imam, R (on the application of) v London Borough of Croydon (2023) UKSC 45 Full transparency – I acted for Crisis on an intervention in this case. [read post]
27 Nov 2023, 2:15 am by INFORRM
On 22 November 2023, the Court of Appeal (Bean, Andrew and Lewis LLJ) handed down judgment in Department for Business and Trade v Information Commissioner  [2023] EWCA Civ 1378. [read post]
20 Nov 2023, 2:36 am by INFORRM
On the same day, Collins Rice J heard an application in the case of McGee v Lewis KB-2023-002435. [read post]
13 Nov 2023, 1:45 am by INFORRM
Notwithstanding potential opposition to the plan in the House of Lords, abolition of Section 40 could spell the formal end of the state-backed press regulation system envisaged by the Leveson report. [read post]
6 Nov 2023, 1:11 am by INFORRM
Lewis Silkin published a blog post about how existing data protection and equality laws would apply to automated decisions in a company’s recruitment process. [read post]
29 Oct 2023, 6:15 pm by Franklin C. McRoberts
Co. v Campbell (538 US 408 [2003]), and Gomez v Cabatic (159 AD3d 62 [2d Dept 2018]). [read post]
27 Oct 2023, 6:02 am by Bill Marler
 E. coli O157:H7 is one of thousands of serotypes Escherichia coli.[1] The combination of letters and numbers in the name of the E. coli O157:H7 refers to the specific antigens (proteins which provoke an antibody response) found on the body and tail or flagellum[2]respectively and distinguish it from other types of E. coli.[3] Most serotypes of E. coli are harmless and live as normal flora in the intestines of healthy humans and… [read post]
24 Oct 2023, 1:12 am by Kouros Sadeghi-Nejad
Attorney’s Office in D.C on May 24th, it was revealed that the individuals in question were charged with “conspiracy to commit an offense against the United States” and causing injury to museum property in violation of Title 40, United States Code, Sections 6303(b)(2): Touching of, or Injuries to, Property. [read post]