Search for: "State v. C. G. B." Results 161 - 180 of 2,341
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
16 May 2011, 1:13 pm by Blog Editorial
R (on the application of G) v The Governors of X School, heard 11 – 12 April 2011. [read post]
30 Oct 2022, 1:20 pm by Giles Peaker
Lowe v Charterhouse (2022) EW Misc 8 (CC) A county court deposit penalty claim judgment, but well worth noting because a) a Circuit Judge decision by HHJ Luba KC, b) there are some broader points in application , and c) well it is quite the case. [read post]
13 Feb 2012, 2:15 am by Laura Sandwell
PP v Secretary of State for the Home Department, (formerly VV [Jordan]), PP v SSHD, W & BB v SSHD and Z, G, U & Y v SSHD, heard 30 – 31 January 2012. [read post]
1 Jul 2019, 11:44 pm by Roel van Woudenberg
The payment of the appeal fee was effected with the date of 17 March 2015.V. [read post]
17 Oct 2013, 12:03 pm by Stephen Bilkis
The landmark case of Guggenheimer v Ginzberg sets forth the guideline that whether plaintiff has stated a cause of action, thereby defeating defendants' motions, the court will consider whether the plaintiff has a cause of action rather than whether he has properly stated one. [read post]
6 Oct 2013, 6:19 pm by Stephen Bilkis
The landmark case of Guggenheimer v Ginzberg sets forth the guideline that whether plaintiff has stated a cause of action, thereby defeating defendants' motions, the court will consider whether the plaintiff has a cause of action rather than whether he has properly stated one. [read post]
4 Nov 2014, 11:44 pm
 (V) Solicitation to commit murder as defined in Section 653f. [read post]
17 Jan 2017, 5:16 am by Daphne Keller
 The section 512(g) counternotification process refers only to 512(c) hosting providers, not other OSPs (e.g., search engines), for starters. [read post]
4 Apr 2011, 3:37 pm by McNabb Associates, P.C.
ARTICLE V (1) Neither of the Contracting Parties shall be bound to deliver up its own nationals under this Treaty but the executive authority of each Contracting Party shall have the power to deliver them up if, in its discretion, it considers that it is proper to do so. (2) For the purposes of this Article - (a) a reference to the executive authority of a Contracting Party shall, in the case of Australia, be construed as a reference to the Attorney-General of Australia; (b)… [read post]
5 Mar 2018, 3:15 am
The Court of Appeal is seeking clarity on issues of jurisdiction over EUTM infringement in circumstances where an undertaking in Member State A (here, Spain) had placed an advertisement on a website targeted at consumers in Member State B (here, the UK): is this sufficient to confer jurisdiction in Member State B under Article 97(5) CTM Regulation (codified) (now Article 125(5) EUTMR 2017/1001)? [read post]
25 Jan 2021, 1:00 am by Matrix Legal Support Service
On Monday 25 January, the Supreme Court will hear the case of G v G. [read post]