Search for: "Briggs v. State" Results 161 - 180 of 368
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
8 Jun 2018, 12:30 pm by Dan Ernst
  THURSDAY The Rights Revolution in Action: The Transformation of State Institutions after the 1960sThu, 6/7: 8:00 AM—9:45 AM, Sheraton Centre Toronto, Forest Hill ·         Chair/Discussant—Sara Mayeux, Vanderbilt University ·         Ingraham v. [read post]
1 Jun 2018, 12:43 am by ASAD KHAN
The structure of s 117B(6) is straightforward because it unambiguously states that there is no public interest in removal where a person has a genuine and subsisting parental relationship with a qualifying child and it would not be reasonable to expect the child to leave the UK. [read post]
22 May 2018, 6:53 am by MICHAEL ETIENNE MATRIX
For the same reasons, the domestic courts recognised that this was an issue which fell into a discretionary area of judgment, where they should defer to the Secretary of State. [read post]
21 May 2018, 1:00 am by Matrix Legal Support Service
R (Hallam) v Secretary of State for Justice; R (Nealon) v Secretary of State for Justice, heard 8-9 May 2018. [read post]
20 Apr 2018, 1:56 am by ANDREW BODNAR, MATRIX
In R v Briggs-Price the House held that if prosecutors wished to introduce alleged benefit from offences not proved at the trial they would have to do so to the criminal standard. [read post]
16 Apr 2018, 1:00 am by Matrix Legal Support Service
R (Stott) v Secretary of State for Justice, heard 18 Jan 2018. [read post]
13 Apr 2018, 8:52 am by Louise Pearce
The Supreme Court On 24 January 2018, Lord Mance, Lord Sumption, Lord Hodge, Lord Lloyd-Jones and Lord Briggs heard the appeal in the Supreme Court. [read post]
28 Mar 2018, 3:37 am by Scott Bomboy
Board of Education of Topeka (1954) decision actually consolidated lawsuits from four states into one case including Briggs v. [read post]
19 Mar 2018, 2:00 am by Matrix Legal Support Service
R (Stott) v Secretary of State for Justice, heard 18 Jan 2018. [read post]
15 Mar 2018, 6:13 am by CMS
Clarke LJ gave three key reasons in support of his conclusion: The structure of the Policy expressly stated that the insured perils were subject always to the exclusions. [read post]
26 Feb 2018, 1:00 am by Matrix Legal Support Service
R (Stott) v Secretary of State for Justice, heard 18 Jan 2018. [read post]
22 Feb 2018, 8:55 am
Michael Silverleaf QC also made submissions on behalf of the Secretary of State for Health. [read post]
1 Feb 2018, 5:17 am by Mark Engstrom
Briggs & Stratton Power Products Group, LLC, United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit, No. 2016-2197, 12 January 2018 appeared first on Kluwer Patent Blog. [read post]
8 Jan 2018, 8:53 am by Schachtman
Briggs, “Use The Wrong P-value, Go To Jail: Not A Joke: Updated With Amicus Brief,” Statistician to the Stars (Oct. 1, 2013). 2 United States v. [read post]
27 Nov 2017, 1:00 am by Matrix Legal Support Service
R (Black) v Secretary of State for Justice, heard 31 Oct-1 Nov 2017. [read post]