Search for: "People v Lord"
Results 1641 - 1660
of 1,806
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
15 Oct 2009, 2:53 pm
JFS sought leave to appeal to the then House of Lords, which was granted. [read post]
14 Oct 2009, 5:30 am
Kaufman v. [read post]
13 Oct 2009, 12:14 am
In EI Du Pont Nemours & Co v United Kingdom Intellectual Property Office [2009] EWCA Civ 966, dated 17 September 2009 but only recently made publicly available (see the SPC blog for more), the Honourable Lord Justice Jacob writes:"Under the SPC scheme an SPC has to be applied for in each Member State where it is wanted - there is no central scheme. [read post]
12 Oct 2009, 1:05 pm
[v] This is money that otherwise would have gone to medical providers. [read post]
12 Oct 2009, 8:24 am
The People's Republic of Bangladesh v. [read post]
12 Oct 2009, 12:01 am
Take, for example, last week’s oral arguments before the Supreme Court in Salazar v. [read post]
1 Oct 2009, 9:46 pm
It appears that nothing will change that conduct and that the Department bears grudges against people who engage lawyers, particularly competent ones.We ask that you please immediately summons the people in your case management area and ask them why it is that they have refused to correspond with me in accordance with Mr Boutsis' directions and requests, refused to provide reports to me, refused to progress his retirement and otherwise behaved in a shamefully non-communicative… [read post]
25 Sep 2009, 11:24 am
In Epperson v. [read post]
22 Sep 2009, 12:58 pm
The Court will only intervene in an exceptional case, R v Brighton and Hove Council, ex parte Nacion [1991] 31 HLR 1095 (Lord Woolf). [read post]
15 Sep 2009, 8:31 am
And because of the pancuronium, the person cannot indicate that the anesthesia never took or wore off.Part of the problem is that the people who are doing the killing aren't trained anesthesiologists (they screw up sometimes, too, of course). [read post]
14 Sep 2009, 2:52 pm
But it is not the issue before this court Comment “But they haven’t done an equality impact assessment” is a fairly common complaint, although even that can be of less use to a challenge than people think; see, for instance, R(Brown) v SSWP [2008] EWHC 3158 (Admin) and R(Meany) v Harlow DC [2009] EWHC 559 (Admin). [read post]
13 Sep 2009, 11:49 pm
This is the first time any of the Courts of Appeal have resolved this issue, which is must reading for anyone who wants to know why they cannot hear a particular song on demand when streaming music online.The case is Arista Records v. [read post]
12 Sep 2009, 10:39 am
Lord Neuberger gave a concurring judgment which touched on a number of interesting points which don’t appear to have been fully argued. [read post]
20 Aug 2009, 9:36 am
In Runa Begum v Tower Hamlets [2003] 2 AC 430, Lords Bingham and Millett had made pretty scathing comments on the lawfulness of contracting out the review function – Lord Bingham (at [10]) had “very considerable doubts” whether it was a function; and Lord Millett agreeing pointed out that the SI was “concerned in very general terms with deregulation and the subcontracting of ordinary local authority… [read post]
19 Aug 2009, 8:14 am
Perry, and finding an Establishment Clause violation in the other, McCreary County v. [read post]
18 Aug 2009, 9:31 pm
Praise the lord and pass the ammunition. [read post]
30 Jul 2009, 11:44 am
’ is as likely to be ‘invading France’ as ‘interviewing Lord Falconer’. [read post]
19 Jul 2009, 10:29 am
In this case, Lord Oliver discusses precisely the point of originality. [read post]
16 Jul 2009, 12:15 am
They the demons shall Pursue thee until thou persist.In People of the State of Michigan v. [read post]
