Search for: "Chambers v. Department of Correction"
Results 21 - 40
of 356
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
26 Dec 2018, 1:00 am
Standard Under Auer v. [read post]
24 Jun 2011, 5:26 am
R (on the application of Cart) (Appellant) v The Upper Tribunal (Respondent); R (on the application of MR (Pakistan)) (FC) (Appellant) v The Upper Tribunal (Immigration & Asylum Chamber) and Secretary of State for the Home Department (Respondent) [2011] UKSC 28, 22/6/2011 – read judgment; press summary here Unappealable decisions of the Upper Tribunal are still subject to judicial review by the High Court, but… [read post]
12 Aug 2013, 8:32 am
Rawlins v. [read post]
12 Aug 2013, 8:32 am
Rawlins v. [read post]
19 Mar 2018, 10:23 am
These departments include the Coast Guard; the U.S. [read post]
30 Nov 2018, 7:36 am
Butt v Norway [2012] ECHR 1905 confirmed the earlier approach and in Jeunesse v Netherlands (2015) 60 EHRR 17 the Grand Chamber authoritatively dealt with the issue further by holding that “settled migrants” were special because the subsequent withdrawal of settlement rights (owing to criminal activities) will constitute an interference with the respect for private and/or family life. [read post]
4 May 2009, 11:25 am
The North Carolina Supreme Court issued its ruling in North Carolina Department of Corrections v. [read post]
4 Nov 2018, 8:09 pm
Natelson’s view, a state legislature commits a mistake almost any time it departs from Article V advocates’ talking points. [read post]
1 Oct 2018, 5:00 pm
[1] Matter of Daesang Corp. v. [read post]
4 Jul 2011, 8:53 am
In R (Cart) v Upper Tribunal; R (MR Pakistan) (FC) v The Upper Tribunal (Immigration & Asylum Chamber) the Supreme Court determined an important question of principle regarding the nature of the relationship between the Upper Tribunal and the High Court, namely the circumstances in which decisions of the Upper Tribunal are open to challenge in judicial review proceedings. [read post]
23 Feb 2023, 6:00 am
In the Matter of New York Civil Liberties Union [CLU] v New York City Department of Correction [DOC], 2023 NY Slip Op 00930, the Appellate Division noted that the personal privacy exemption in Public Officers Law §87(2)*allows state agencies to protect sensitive matters "which are of little or no public interest, and which may include unsubstantiated allegations," citing Matter of New York Times Co. v City of New York Off. of the Mayor, 194 AD3d… [read post]
23 Feb 2023, 6:00 am
In the Matter of New York Civil Liberties Union [CLU] v New York City Department of Correction [DOC], 2023 NY Slip Op 00930, the Appellate Division noted that the personal privacy exemption in Public Officers Law §87(2)*allows state agencies to protect sensitive matters "which are of little or no public interest, and which may include unsubstantiated allegations," citing Matter of New York Times Co. v City of New York Off. of the Mayor, 194 AD3d… [read post]
11 Aug 2007, 3:22 am
Department of Corrections "Execution by LethalInjection Procedures," effective for executionsafter August 1, 2007 Exhibit 3. [read post]
22 Sep 2010, 10:13 am
Pictures of the center are available from the CA Department of Corrections here. [read post]
21 Jun 2015, 4:08 pm
The most important decision of the week was that of the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights on 16 June 2015 in the case of Delfi AS v Estonia in relation to the liability of an online news portal for offensive reader comments. [read post]
22 Jan 2012, 6:59 am
…. with the words of Mr David Bowie ringing in my ears, I bring you a decison of the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) all about changes and how and when to make them. [read post]
22 Jan 2012, 6:59 am
…. with the words of Mr David Bowie ringing in my ears, I bring you a decison of the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) all about changes and how and when to make them. [read post]
11 Mar 2022, 4:22 am
Oscar Davies, a barrister at Lamb Chambers, and Jack Castle, a barrister at Henderson Chambers, offer their views on the Elan-Cane decision (R (On the application of Elan-Cane) v Secretary of State for the Home Department) [2021] UKSC 56) in this piece that first appeared in the New Law Journal. [read post]
28 Mar 2019, 9:24 pm
The facts of Murphy v. [read post]
14 Oct 2016, 4:07 pm
The parties disagreed on the correct interpretation of Gulati. [read post]
