Search for: "English v. State"
Results 1261 - 1280
of 6,403
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
3 Nov 2016, 8:02 am
R (Miller) v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union 2016 EWHC 2768 (Admin) see http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2016/2768.pdf A spokesperson from the Crown – or UK gov’t – or the Tory party, pick your poison, announced, as one might expect, that the decision will be appealed. [read post]
15 Jul 2015, 4:00 am
Wilson v. [read post]
31 Jan 2016, 2:38 am
The case of Sobrinho v Impresa Publishing ([2016] EWHC 66 (QB)) was a defamation claim in respect of an article in a Portuguese newspaper which alleged illegality on the part of a banker. [read post]
12 Jun 2013, 8:00 am
Canada is not a US State, and indeed a different country with different laws. [read post]
2 Mar 2013, 1:58 am
It also reflects the growing influence of Strasbourg jurisprudence on English defamation law. [read post]
[Guest Post] 21 and illegal in all states? The German Pelham court confirms when sampling is illegal
5 May 2020, 1:20 am
Currently, it is only available in German, but Alan Hui has kindly provided an English translation, and this post on the decision. [read post]
20 Jul 2010, 6:57 am
Sean Wajert tells us of a remarkable failure-to-warn case, Steven Morris v. [read post]
4 Dec 2009, 4:30 am
Chambers v. [read post]
16 Nov 2006, 4:10 pm
Refusing to appear in a civil court in the United States is an option but not an advisable one. [read post]
2 Sep 2023, 8:46 am
The case of State v. [read post]
18 Dec 2017, 6:58 am
This past week, the Sixth Circuit of the United States Court of Appeals affirmed the decision of the United States District Court in the case of Sun Life Assurance Co. v. [read post]
7 Jan 2014, 8:43 am
McDermott and Jenkins v. [read post]
10 Nov 2008, 6:39 pm
Aug. 7, 1990); In re English Seafood (USA) Inc., 743 F.Supp. 281, 286-89 (D.Del.1990) (holding that the court has subject matter jurisdiction over the plaintiff's claim for corporate dissolution, but that the court should abstain from exercising it); Codos v. [read post]
26 Oct 2011, 2:44 am
The Supreme Court unanimously dismissed the appeal, stating that the criminal standard of proof was not required for confiscation, and that the English court was entitled to consider evidence which formed the basis of a previous charge against the appellants in Portugal as there was no link between the proceedings. [read post]
26 Oct 2011, 2:44 am
The Supreme Court unanimously dismissed the appeal, stating that the criminal standard of proof was not required for confiscation, and that the English court was entitled to consider evidence which formed the basis of a previous charge against the appellants in Portugal as there was no link between the proceedings. [read post]
19 Jun 2017, 6:06 am
” United States v. [read post]
