Search for: "HM " Results 1901 - 1920 of 2,286
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
12 Mar 2010, 9:32 am by Anastasia de Waal
  However, a snapshot survey by HM Inspectorate of Constabulary found that officers do not turn up to 23% of antisocial behaviour complaints and more than half of the 43 police forces in England and Wales cannot automatically identify repeat victims of crime- one in five of whom are disabled- leaving officers ignorant of vulnerable people in need of help. [read post]
11 Mar 2010, 1:00 pm by Lucas A. Ferrara, Esq.
To date, eleven firms have signed onto the Code: The Carlyle Group, Riverstone Holdings LLC, Pacific Corporate Group Holdings, LLC, HM Capital Partners I, Levine Leichtman Capital Partners, Access Capital Partners, Falconhead Capital, Markstone Capital Group, Wetherly Capital Group, Ares, and Freeman Spogli. [read post]
9 Mar 2010, 2:30 am by sally
Martin v HM Advocate; Miller v HM Advocate Supreme Court “It was within the competence of the Scottish Parliament to enact a provision which raised to 12 months the maximum term of imprisonment which a sheriff sitting without a jury could impose for the offence of driving while disqualified. [read post]
2 Mar 2010, 1:09 am by sally
Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Olden v Serious Organised Crime Agency [2010] EWCA Civ 143 (26 February 2010) Mohamed, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for Foreign & Commonwealth Affairs (Rev 1) [2010] EWCA Civ 158 (26 February 2010) LG, R (on the application of) v Independent Appeal Panel for Tom Hood School & Ors [2010] EWCA Civ 142 (26 February 2010) Mann v Northern Electric Distribution Ltd [2010] EWCA Civ 141 (26 February 2010) Stanford International Bank Ltd, Re [2010]… [read post]
1 Mar 2010, 3:15 am by sally
High Court (Queen’s Bench) Veolia Water Central Ltd v London Fire & Emergency Planning Authority [2010] EWHC 208 (QB) (09 February 2010) Moore v Hotelplan Ltd (t/a Inghams Travel) & Anor [2010] EWHC 276 (QB) (22 February 2010) Rutherford v Seymour Pierce Ltd [2010] EWHC 375 (QB) (11 February 2010) Law Society of England and Wales v Secretary of State for Justice & Anor [2010] EWHC 352 (QB) (26 February 2010) High Court (Chancery Division) Sharafi & Anor v Woven Rugs Ltd &… [read post]
28 Feb 2010, 10:00 pm
NATO maintains a three-ship flotilla - which also includes the frigates USS Boone and the British HMS Chatham - to fight the pirates. [read post]
25 Feb 2010, 12:14 am by charonqc
  HMS York has been sent to the Falklands to stiffen the already potent militarty presence in the islands and there are reports of a submarine skulking in the waters nearby. [read post]
23 Feb 2010, 1:48 am by sally
“As the recession began to bite, the Chancellor gave an undertaking that HM Revenue & Customs would take a more accommodating approach to businesses that genuinely had difficulty in making tax payments on time. [read post]
17 Feb 2010, 9:33 am by michael
Supreme Court Tomlinson & Ors v Birmingham City Council [2010] UKSC 8 (17 February 2010) Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Harley & Ors v Smith & Anor [2010] EWCA Civ 78 (17 February 2010) Actavis UK Ltd v Novartis AG [2010] EWCA Civ 82 (17 February 2010) Davies & Anor, R (on the application of) v HM Revenue & Customs [2010] EWCA Civ 83 (16 February 2010) Virdi v The Law Society of England and Wales & Anor [2010] EWCA Civ 100 (16 February 2010) Smith v Youth Justice… [read post]
17 Feb 2010, 5:17 am by michael
Allison v HM Advocate Supreme Court “In criminal proceedings in Scotland, the Crown was under the same obligation to disclose to the defence any outstanding charges against a prosecution witness as it was to disclose a witness’s previous convictions. [read post]
14 Feb 2010, 5:23 am by Ray Mullman
HMS Holdings with 123 beds and 1 facility 7. [read post]
11 Feb 2010, 2:52 am by traceydennis
McInnes v HM Advocate Supreme Court “When considering whether a criminal conviction in Scotland should be overturned because of a failure by the Crown to disclose witness statements to the defence, the question for the High Court of Justiciary to consider was whether, taking all the circumstances of the trial into account, there was a real possibility that the jury would have arrived at a different verdict if the material had been available. [read post]