Search for: "Paras v. State"
Results 1361 - 1380
of 6,181
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
14 Nov 2019, 2:34 am
As the Court rightly pointed out, the EAPO Regulation does not clearly state if the acts in question (judgments, court settlements, and authentic instruments) have to be enforceable (para. 39). [read post]
12 Nov 2019, 10:31 am
At workThe judgmentThe Court recalled that freedom of expression also applies in the context of private employment relations (Heinisch v Germany, No 28274/08) and that the State has a positive obligation to ensure that a fair balance is struck between the competing interest of the individual and of the community as a whole. [read post]
12 Nov 2019, 8:00 am
” Bank of America v. [read post]
10 Nov 2019, 7:34 pm
In Peixeiro at para. 30, the Court stated that the cause of action does not exist until sufficient severity of injury exists. [read post]
5 Nov 2019, 8:57 am
Now, we have encountered r.13 before (see our note on Willow Court v Alexander here). [read post]
5 Nov 2019, 8:07 am
(para. 38) Section 2(b) also protects the right not to be compelled to say something with which one disagrees (National Bank of Canada v. [read post]
4 Nov 2019, 4:21 pm
On 4 November 2019 Warby J gave judgment in the case of Lord Sheikh v Associated Newspapers [2019] EWHC 2947 (QB) finding that a MailOnline article made a defamatory allegation against the the claimant, a Conservative Member of the House of Lords. [read post]
1 Nov 2019, 9:16 am
Since the release of the UK Supreme Court's decision in Unilever v Shanks [2019] UKSC 45 (IPKat post here) the mainstream and social media have been awash with hyperbole as to the potential impact of the decision on large employers. [read post]
1 Nov 2019, 6:02 am
In Neo v Anan Kasei([2019]EWCA Civ 1646) the Court of Appeal again considered the thorny issue of insufficiency, both the Kirin-Amgenand the Biogen kind. [read post]
29 Oct 2019, 1:55 pm
See United States v. [read post]
28 Oct 2019, 11:31 am
This portion of the act was written in response to the ruling of Microsoft Corp. v. [read post]
27 Oct 2019, 2:18 pm
Its deficiencies were acknowledged in the Court of Appeal’s decision in Burnip v Birmingham City Council [2012] EWCA Civ 629; [2013] PTSR 117, para 46. [read post]
25 Oct 2019, 7:42 pm
From A.M. v. [read post]
24 Oct 2019, 4:00 am
Driedger’s modern principle[1] is often referred to as it was stated in Re Rizzo & Rizzo Shoes Ltd, [1998] 1 SCR 27 at para 21: “Today there is only one principle or approach, namely, the words of the Act are to be read in their entire context, and in their grammatical and ordinary sense harmoniously with the scheme of the Act, the object of the Act, and the intention of Parliament. [read post]
23 Oct 2019, 9:38 am
State v. [read post]
23 Oct 2019, 8:15 am
In Illinois v. [read post]
18 Oct 2019, 6:09 am
Times (Oct. 3, 2019). [20] United States v. [read post]
17 Oct 2019, 8:10 pm
In Microsoft Corp. v. [read post]
16 Oct 2019, 4:29 pm
The Court in Gürbüz and Bayar v. [read post]
