Search for: "MacFarlane v. MacFarlane"
Results 141 - 152
of 152
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
10 Jul 2023, 7:24 am
To illustrate, in Shore v. [read post]
27 May 2018, 4:36 pm
IPSO Rulings IPSO has published a series of rulings and three Resolution Statements from the Complaints Committee: Resolution Statement 18923-17 Dixon v The Sun, resolved via IPSO mediation Resolution Statement 20931-17 Dixon v Sun.co.uk, resolved via IPSO mediation Resolution Statement – 00918-18 Dixon v Mail Online, resolved via ISPO mediation 00916-18 The Scottish Government… [read post]
19 Feb 2017, 4:02 pm
Last week in the Courts The trial in the case of Hourani v Thomson concluded on 13 February 2017. [read post]
29 Jan 2017, 4:08 pm
As already mentioned, on 24, 25 and 26 January 2017, the Supreme Court (Lords Neuberger, Mance, Sumption, Hughes and Hodge) heard the joined appeals in the cases of Flood v Times Newspapers, Miller v Associated Newspapers and Frost v MGN. [read post]
26 Oct 2010, 7:36 am
It was involved in the R. v. [read post]
26 Mar 2017, 4:06 pm
An application for permission to appeal has been lodged in the case of ZXC v Bloomberg. [read post]
16 Apr 2023, 10:29 am
The original decision was made by the President of the Family Division Sir Andrew MacFarlane (see Abbasi & Anor v Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2021] EWHC 1699 (Fam), [2022] 1 FLR 348). [read post]
22 Nov 2018, 4:00 am
This conference was held five years after the first SRL Dialogue which addressed the research undertaken by Professor Julie Macfarlane about self-represented litigants (SRLs). [read post]
2 Feb 2017, 2:18 pm
In response to outcry over President Trump’s reorganization of the National Security Council—and particularly Steve Bannon’s elevation to the NSC and his permanent invite to the NSC’s Principals Committee—Senator Mark Warner (D-VA), the ranking Democrat on the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence announced that he was introducing a bill to codify and strictly limit NSC membership. [read post]
15 Dec 2010, 4:27 pm
"23 In Craven v. [read post]
6 Jan 2021, 4:00 am
Similarly, in the Alberta decision Webb v Birkett, 2011 ABCA 13, the lawyer was under the impression that collaborative practice allowed for a reduced standard of financial disclosure. [read post]
1 Jun 2021, 7:15 am
Three issues (at least) arise from the intention to add sections 90Q.1 and 90Q.2 to Part V of the CA, 1867: which part of the constitutional amending procedure applies? [read post]
