Search for: "State v. R. G." Results 1861 - 1880 of 4,530
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
31 Mar 2018, 8:56 am by Thorsten Bausch
Therefore, what the member states earn in official fees, they will typically lose in corporate or income taxes. [read post]
5 Jul 2012, 2:13 am by GuestPost
Indeed in the case of G v An Bord Uchtala [1980] IR32 the Supreme Court emphasised that an unmarried mother and her child do not constitute a family within the meaning of Art 41. [read post]
10 Dec 2009, 2:36 am
NOTE: In 2008 the Justice Policy Institute estimated what it would cost each state to implment AWA -v- What the state would lose for not implmenting AWA. 12-9-2009 National: The answer is simple, NO, states will not lose a dime for not enacting the provisions of AWA. [read post]
7 Jan 2011, 12:52 pm by axd10
R., et. al., MDL consolidation of aviation disaster cases before and after Lexecon {Lexecon, Inc. v. [read post]
19 Nov 2009, 4:20 pm
The Council is obliged subject to some qualifications that are irrelevant for present purposes, to issue an abatement notice the purpose of which is to prevent the continuation or recurrence of the nuisance where they are satisfied that such a nuisance exists, see R v Carrick District Council ex parte Shelley [1996] Env LR 273. [read post]
6 May 2010, 2:56 am
In support of this wide construction of s. 2(g), the Court cited, inter alia, its decision in Union of India v. [read post]
10 Oct 2009, 5:55 am
Milkborne disease outbreaks by Food category, United States, 1973-2005 (source: FTCLDF via CDC). [read post]