Search for: "State v. London"
Results 1241 - 1260
of 3,575
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
17 Jan 2022, 1:21 am
Bott & Co Solicitors v Ryanair DAC, heard 20 May 2021 East of England Ambulance Service NHS Trust v Flowers and Ors, heard 22 June 2021 R (on the application of O (a minor, by her litigation friend AO)) v Secretary of State for the Home Department and R (on the application of The Project for the Registration of Children as British Citizens) v Secretary of State for the Home Department) (Expedited), heard 23 and 24 June 2021 Basfar… [read post]
11 Mar 2011, 11:50 am
Last week in Ward v. [read post]
4 Jul 2008, 3:14 pm
Tipton Eastern District of Kentucky at London 08a0400n.06 2008/07/02 United States Surety Company v. [read post]
4 Jul 2008, 3:14 pm
Tipton Eastern District of Kentucky at London 08a0400n.06 2008/07/02 United States Surety Company v. [read post]
27 Jun 2011, 9:35 am
This is also apparent from Article 7, which states that the Directive shall not affect the right of member states “to apply or introduce laws, regulations or administrative provisions which are more favourable to employees. [read post]
22 Sep 2011, 5:57 am
New London, recently apologized to petitioner Susette Kelo and told her that he would have changed his vote had he known her full story. [read post]
7 May 2018, 1:00 am
Williams & Anor v London Borough of Hackney, heard 14-15 Feb 2018. [read post]
7 Jul 2010, 12:34 pm
That conclusion, which, in our judgment, follows from the plain meaning of subsection (4), is supported by the authorities: see in particular Wilson v First County Trust Ltd [2001] QB 407, Watchtower Investments Ltd v Payne [2001] EWCA Civ 1159, [2001] GCCR 3055 and Wilson v Robertsons (London) Ltd [2005] EWHC 1425 (Ch), [2006] 1 WLR 1248. [read post]
7 Jul 2010, 12:34 pm
That conclusion, which, in our judgment, follows from the plain meaning of subsection (4), is supported by the authorities: see in particular Wilson v First County Trust Ltd [2001] QB 407, Watchtower Investments Ltd v Payne [2001] EWCA Civ 1159, [2001] GCCR 3055 and Wilson v Robertsons (London) Ltd [2005] EWHC 1425 (Ch), [2006] 1 WLR 1248. [read post]
2 Aug 2015, 4:01 pm
Being unsure whether allowing exploitation of works without prior permission from the relevant rightholder is permitted, the French Council of State has just sought guidance from the CJEU. [read post]
23 Feb 2012, 10:36 am
Exxon Mobil Corp. v. [read post]
29 Jul 2020, 4:19 pm
The facts of Richard v BBC [2018] EWHC 1837 (Ch) help demonstrate this. [read post]
3 May 2022, 6:12 am
De Matos (Brunel University London)The Shadows of Modern State Law: a Visual Genealogy of Dark KnightsSophie Doherty (Dublin City University)What does Justice in the Aftermath of Sexual Violence look like? [read post]
30 Jul 2017, 11:30 am
”In the London Review of Books, Andrew Bacevich covers The General v. the President: MacArthur and Truman at the Brink of Nuclear War by H.W. [read post]
11 Mar 2015, 1:51 am
FLAG -- meets next week on the evening of 18 March, in the House of Lords, London. [read post]
21 Jan 2022, 6:35 am
Haier I and Sisvel v. [read post]
5 Jul 2013, 8:25 am
Professor Seck has recently been considering ramifications of Kiobel v Royal Dutch Petroleum 569 U. [read post]
1 Dec 2017, 6:20 am
Do you think London cabs have such a distinctive character enough to hold a trade mark? [read post]
7 Sep 2010, 9:00 am
Merton London Borough Council, [1978] A.C. 728. [read post]
11 Dec 2009, 11:08 am
The Court noted that AXA would only have the duty to defend the City if the Statements of Claim in the underlying actions alleged a state of facts that, properly construed, would support an action that could potentially fall within coverage: Non-Marine Underwriters, Lloyds of London v. [read post]
