Search for: "V D"
Results 1761 - 1780
of 76,323
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
2 May 2012, 3:00 am
(D. [read post]
21 Feb 2011, 10:57 am
Werynski v Mediatel 4B spólka z o o (Case C-283/09); [2011] WLR (D) 50 “In respect of acts which had been adopted in the field of Title IV of the EC Treaty, since December 1 2009 the Court of Justice of the European Union has had jurisdiction to hear and determine a reference for a preliminary ruling from a court against whose decision there was a judicial remedy under national law even where the reference was lodged prior to that date. [read post]
28 Oct 2019, 5:27 am
Here are the materials in Koi Nation of Northern California v. [read post]
28 Nov 2017, 9:00 pm
Ne sachant pas si le compte courant était suffisamment approvisionné, le mandataire n'avait pas pu appliquer la pratique habituelle consistant à déposer l'acte de recours et payer la taxe simultanément, avec une double vérification assistant/mandataire. [read post]
8 Feb 2016, 6:46 am
She is Professor of Law and Distinguished University Scholar here at the Louis D. [read post]
29 Jul 2013, 6:35 am
As this Court explained in Arizona Public Service Co. v. [read post]
19 May 2011, 2:50 am
Regina (GC) v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis (Liberty and another intervening); Regina (C) v Same (Same intervening) [2011] UKSC 21; [2011] WLR (D) 162 “The statutory discretion for the police to retain biometric data obtained from criminal suspects who were subsequently not proceeded against or were acquitted could be exercised in a rational and proportionate manner which respected and fulfilled the statutory purpose but did not… [read post]
6 Dec 2011, 1:59 am
Leeds Group plc v Leeds City Council (No 2); Regina (Leeds Group plc) v Leeds City Council (No 2) [2011] EWCA Civ 1447; [2011] WLR (D) 347 “Sections 98 and 103(2) of the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000, which inserted subsection (1A) into section 22 of the Commons Registration Act 1965, thereby amending the definition of town or village green, were clear and unambiguous and the new policy in subsection (1A) applied in its entirety to all applications to… [read post]
26 May 2011, 2:00 am
Regina (Kambadzi) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [On appeal from Regina (SK (Zimbabwe)) v Secretary of State for the Home Department] [2011] UKSC 23; [2011] WLR (D) 175 “In addition to complying with the statutory requirements for detaining a foreign national who was awaiting deportation from the United Kingdom, the Secretary of State was also required to comply with the published Home Office policy relating to the detention of such persons. [read post]
3 Oct 2009, 11:08 am
State v. [read post]
26 Oct 2023, 6:23 pm
Circuit Review – United States v. [read post]
17 Feb 2010, 3:54 am
Oceanbulk Shipping and Trading SA v TMT Asia Ltd and others [2010] EWCA Civ 79; [2010] WLR (D) 40 “There was not, and need not be, an exception to the ‘without prejudice’ rule such as to permit evidence of ‘without prejudice’ communications and discussions to be given if there was a dispute about the interpretation of a written settlement agreement. [read post]
15 Jun 2009, 2:19 am
Chocoladefabriken Lindt & Sprüngli AG v Franz Hauswirth GmbH (Case C-529/07); [2009] WLR (D) 182 “The fact that, at the time of applying for registration of a sign as a trade mark, the applicant knew or was to be taken as knowing that an identical or similar sign capable of being confused with the applicant's sign [...] [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]
3 Dec 2012, 3:36 am
Wildsmith and others v Arrowgate Ltd (Landgate (New Homes) Ltd intervening) [2012] EWHC 3315 (Ch); [2012] WLR (D) 358 “A notice served under section 27 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1987 had to spell out exactly what the applicants were complaining about and why they contended it was an appropriate case for the making of an acquisition order under section 29 of the Act. [read post]
26 Nov 2009, 2:23 am
Office of Fair Trading v Abbey National plc and others [2009] UKSC 6; [2009] WLR (D) 341 "Charges levied by banks in respect of unauthorised overdrafts were part of a 'package' of services and consideration and their fairness was exempt from review under reg 6(2)(b) of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999. [read post]
29 Oct 2012, 4:47 am
Folien Fischer AG and another v Ritrama SpA (Case C-133/11); [2012] WLR (D) 292 “An action for a negative declaration seeking to establish the absence of liability in tort, delict, or quasi-delict fell within the scope of article 5(3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (OJ 2001 L12, p 1).” WLR Daily, 25th October 2012 Source: www.iclr.co.uk [read post]
10 Dec 2009, 9:42 am
Glaister and others v Appleby-in-Westmorland Town Council [2009] EWCA Civ 1325; [2009] WLR (D) 359 Â "A local council did not owe a duty of care to claimants to arrange public liability insurance to cover the risk of injury occurring at a long-established horse fair taking place on land part of which it owned, nor to ensure [...] [read post]
27 Jul 2010, 2:15 am
Regina (Cart) v Upper Tribunal (Public Law Project intervening) [2010] EWCA Civ 859; [2010] WLR (D) 198 “The Upper Tribunal, while subject to the supervisory jurisdiction of the High Court, was not amenable to judicial review to correct an error of law made in the course of an adjudication which the tribunal was authorised to make. [read post]
1 Jul 2011, 2:48 am
Astellas Pharma Ltd and others v Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty and others [2011] EWCA Civ 752; [2011] WLR (D) 213 “An injunction obtained in representative proceedings was binding on all persons represented in the claim, but a judge was entitled, in the exercise of his discretion, to refuse to frame the order in terms which would make it enforceable by or against persons who were not parties to the claim. [read post]
