Search for: "Cost v. Cost"
Results 1661 - 1680
of 48,939
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
4 Feb 2011, 11:01 am
Attorney Grogan has filed no objection to costs [...] [read post]
18 Nov 2008, 12:20 pm
Employer contributions to the health insurance fund shall be adjusted as necessary to provide for such payments [emphasis supplied].A similar effort to shift the payment of premiums for Medicare from the State to retirees of the State was rejected by the Appellate Division [United University Professions v. [read post]
16 Jan 2009, 4:16 am
I admit work related child care costs might not have the general interest of Swadner v. [read post]
7 Apr 2014, 12:00 pm
Rubin recounts a recent Florida case, Aldrich v. [read post]
25 Jun 2008, 10:08 am
The Darklight Film Festival is hosting what should be a very interesting symposium on Privacy v. [read post]
14 Aug 2016, 3:26 pm
Theis J dealt with a similar claim in Kent County Council v M & K (by her children’s guardian) [2016] EWFC 28, but it did not seem from that judgment as if this issue was fully aired, and possibly neither the advocates nor the court had appreciated the full breadth of the LAAs power (and duty) to recoup costs against damages through the statutory charge provisions – having looked into this it is pretty clear that the recoupment provisions and guidance mean that… [read post]
17 May 2013, 1:31 pm
'Claims' and 'remediation costs' are thus two bases for coverage under the policy. [read post]
12 Feb 2011, 10:08 am
In today’s case (Derbyshire v. [read post]
8 Mar 2019, 7:37 am
The case, Anadarko Petroleum Corporation, et al. v. [read post]
19 Aug 2008, 10:54 am
The case of Berry v Spousals (Midlands) Limited & Cape Darlington - (Birmingham CC) 24/4/07 concerned an asbestos related claim which settled for £5,000. [read post]
24 Nov 2011, 3:48 am
Schütz (UK) Ltd v Werit UK Ltd and another (No 3) [2011] EWCA Civ 1337; [2011] WLR (D) 338 “The ‘transaction’ which an exclusive licensee of a patent was required by section 68 of the Patents Act 1977 to have registered within six months if the court was to award him costs in proceedings for infringement of that patent was the first transaction that had made him an exclusive licensee.” WLR Daily, 22nd November 2011 Source: www.iclr.co.uk [read post]
5 Nov 2020, 10:00 pm
On November 10, right after the election, the US Supreme Court will hear arguments in California v. [read post]
2 Mar 2010, 1:45 am
Regina (Perinpanathan) v City of Westminster Magistrates Court and Another Court of Appeal “Magistrates were entitled not to order the police to pay the costs of a claimant who had successfully defended a forfeiture case on the ground that the police had reasonably and properly brought the proceedings in the public interest. [read post]
5 Nov 2020, 10:00 pm
On November 10, right after the election, the US Supreme Court will hear arguments in California v. [read post]
5 Nov 2020, 10:00 pm
On November 10, right after the election, the US Supreme Court will hear arguments in California v. [read post]
9 Jun 2011, 9:26 am
” Auer v. [read post]
19 Jul 2012, 4:56 am
Regina (Health and Safety Executive) v Wolverhampton City Council: [2012] UKSC 34; [2012] WLR (D) 212 “A local planning authority, when considering under section 97 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 whether to revoke a planning permission it had previously granted, was entitled to have regard to the cost of the compensation it would have to pay to the developer out of public funds should it decide to revoke. [read post]
17 Dec 2009, 2:20 am
Axa Insurance Ltd v Akhter & Darby and Others Court of Appeal "An insurer’s cause of action for negligent advice by insured solicitors accrued when after-the-event insurance cover, creating contingent liability, had been issued to defendant solicitors to protect costs and expenses of litigants to bring actions and not when the litigants’ claims failed thereby causing financial [...] [read post]
5 Nov 2020, 10:00 pm
On November 10, right after the election, the US Supreme Court will hear arguments in California v. [read post]
25 Mar 2008, 4:55 am
Halabi (a Bankrupt) v Camden London Borough Council and Another Chancery Division “The current practice in some county courts of annulling a bankruptcy order, on the basis of an undertaking from the bankrupt's solicitor to pay the debts, costs and expenses of the bankruptcy, was not within the jurisdiction of the court. [read post]
