Search for: "BISHOP v. BISHOP" Results 81 - 100 of 1,383
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
12 Apr 2023, 3:57 am by Frank Cranmer
In Bird v DP (a pseudonym) [2023] VSCA 66 (3 April), the respondent had claimed damages for psychological injuries which, he alleged, he had sustained as a result of assaults committed by a Roman Catholic priest, Father Bryan Coffey at the home of his parents in Port Fairy, Victoria, in 1971. [read post]
31 Mar 2023, 1:00 am by David Pocklington
Having regard to Re Blagdon Cemetery [2002] Fam 299, and to the paper presented to the Court by Bishop Christopher Hill on the Theology of Burial [“A Note on the theology of burial in relation to some contemporary questions”, (2004) 7 Ecc LJ 447], de Mestre Ch. determined that there were sufficient exceptional circumstances to justify the grant of a faculty. [read post]
17 Mar 2023, 2:45 pm by Kalvis Golde
Synod of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia v. [read post]
19 Feb 2023, 12:17 am by Frank Cranmer
  COVID restrictions in Canada In New Brunswick v His Tabernacle Family Church Inc. [read post]
10 Feb 2023, 12:30 pm by John Ross
The event will feature panels on official accountability—including an appearance from one of the plaintiffs in Monroe v. [read post]
10 Feb 2023, 4:14 am by David Pocklington
It could once be said that ‘uniformity…is one of the leading and distinguishing principles of the Church of England – nothing is left to the discretion and fancy of the individual’ (Newbery v. [read post]
5 Feb 2023, 1:20 am by Frank Cranmer
The ECtHR Grand Chamber judgment in Fedotova v Russia on the legal recognition of same-sex couples. [read post]
2 Feb 2023, 6:30 am by John Mikhail
In addition, Wilson was one of the main authors of the 1790 Pennsylvania constitution—another surprisingly neglected fact about him, which bears on Moore v. [read post]
29 Jan 2023, 4:40 am by Frank Cranmer
Masterpiece Cakeshop again In Scardina v Masterpiece Cakeshop Inc (CO Ct App. [read post]
24 Jan 2023, 2:41 am by Frank Cranmer
Critically, it was the decision of the sponsoring bishop  – in this case the Bishop of Shrewsbury – to send a candidate to a Bishops Advisory Panel; and she had decided not to sponsor Professor McCalla for a Panel assessment “because she did not discern the required vocation in the claimant” [46]. [read post]