Search for: "London v. State"
Results 1821 - 1840
of 4,150
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
25 Apr 2015, 4:03 am
Presenters often appear to be ill-briefed and insufficiently armed with the facts necessary to challenge assertions made by interviewees in live interviews, reflecting not just pressure on them but a lack of understanding by programme researchers and producers He also pointed to ‘evidence of a misunderstanding of the political process in the EU’, drawing attention in particular to written evidence submitted by the Labour Party which stated that ‘too often it seems that… [read post]
23 Apr 2015, 3:38 am
State broadcaster Television New Zealand (TVNZ) and pay-television operators Sky, Lightbox and MediaWorks, have confirmed they are preparing legal action against Call Plus and Bypass Network Services on the basis of breach of copyright. [read post]
22 Apr 2015, 6:04 pm
Use of STV in United States Single transferable vote systems are used in municipal elections in the United States in San Francisco, California; Minneapolis, Minnesota; St. [read post]
22 Apr 2015, 7:34 am
As stated in North v North [2007] EWCA Civ 760 he ‘is not an insurer against all hazards’. [read post]
22 Apr 2015, 4:30 am
The controlling case is Robak v. [read post]
21 Apr 2015, 2:17 am
Factual Background OA’s operations in England consisted of a head office in London, premises in Manchester and a ticket office at Heathrow. [read post]
20 Apr 2015, 7:21 am
Mikel v. [read post]
20 Apr 2015, 4:36 am
The witnesses stated that they were unexpectedly touched by PVDD in a sexually suggestive manner, which felt like sexual intimidation. [read post]
20 Apr 2015, 2:19 am
Events 29 April 2015 Advertising & Marketing Law Conference, IBC Legal Conferences, London 12 May 2015, IBC’s 22nd Annual Defamation and Privacy Conference, Grange City Hotel, London Media Law in Other Jurisdictions Australia In the case of Gacic v John Fairfax Publications Pty Ltd ([2015] NSWCA 99) the Court of Appeal in New South Wales allowed the appeal and cross-appeal on damages. [read post]
17 Apr 2015, 9:30 am
Hotak v London Borough of Southwark; Johnson v Solihull; and Kanu v London Borough of Southwark, heard on 15 December 2014. [read post]
16 Apr 2015, 4:41 am
However, the Secretary of State indicated that 16 zones and agglomerations in the UK, including Greater London, could not be realistically met by 1 January 2015, and some could not even be expected to be achieved by 2025. [read post]
15 Apr 2015, 2:13 pm
Now the Supreme Court in SG & Ors, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (SSWP) [2015] UKSC 16 accepted that: The majority of non-working households with children are single parent households, and the vast majority of single parents are women (92% in 2011). [read post]
14 Apr 2015, 2:16 am
Defamation on Facebook: Isparta v Richter 2013 6 SA 529 (GP) Potchefstroom Electronic Law Journal, Vol. 17, No. 6, 2014, Anneliese Roos and Magda Slabbert, SSRN The Resistance of Memory: Could the European Union’s Right to be Forgotten Exist in the United States? [read post]
14 Apr 2015, 1:05 am
Poloko Hiri is a final year LLB (Hons) student at GSM London. [read post]
13 Apr 2015, 7:40 am
In Mendez v. [read post]
10 Apr 2015, 8:13 am
Hotak v London Borough of Southwark; Johnson v Solihull; and Kanu v London Borough of Southwark, heard on 15 December 2014. [read post]
8 Apr 2015, 1:16 pm
She stated that she thought it was only necessary to have an appeal bundle once permission has been granted. [read post]
7 Apr 2015, 1:00 am
In R v Waltham London Borough Council, ex parte Vale, The Times, 28 February 1985, Taylor J held that the ordinary residence of such a person was the ordinary residence of their parents or guardians. [read post]
3 Apr 2015, 11:28 am
” The Court reminded itself of the high threshold for a mandatory, rather than prohibitory injunction, of a ‘strong prima facie case’, via Francis V Kensington and Chelsea Royal London Borough Council [2003] 1 WLR 2248, then went on to the criteria for the exercise of the discretion to accommodate pending appeal in R v Camden London Borough Council ex parte Mohammed [1997] 30 HLR 315. [read post]
2 Apr 2015, 12:48 am
We should have seen it coming Some, including Dr Orla Lynskey of the London School of Economics, are unfazed, arguing that ‘We should have seen it coming’ because ‘the case law prior to Google Spain is entirely consistent with the court’s findings in the judgment’. [read post]
