Search for: "GILHAM v. US " Results 1 - 15 of 15
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
9 Oct 2019, 7:18 am by Mathew Purchase, Matrix Chambers
Gilham v Ministry of Justice , heard 5 June 2019 and 6 June 2019. [read post]
27 Aug 2020, 10:30 am by INFORRM
On 12 August 2020, HHJ Lewis sitting as a judge of the High Court handed down judgment in Gilham v MGN Ltd & Anor [2020] EWHC 2217 (QB). [read post]
25 Aug 2023, 2:08 am by Frank Cranmer
Mr Green posted on X (still better known to some of us as Twitter) that a further preliminary hearing has been listed for November and a final hearing for April 2024. [read post]
6 Nov 2019, 3:05 am by Florence Campbell Jones
The Supreme Court decision in Gilham v Ministry of Justice3 held that PIDA protections can apply to holders of public office even without any formal contracts of employment. [read post]
8 Jul 2019, 1:00 am by Matrix Legal Support Service
Gilham v Ministry of Justice, heard 5-6 Jun 2019. [read post]
29 Jul 2019, 1:00 am by Matrix Legal Support Service
Gilham v Ministry of Justice, heard 5-6 Jun 2019. [read post]
1 Jul 2019, 1:00 am by Matrix Legal Support Service
Gilham v Ministry of Justice, heard 5-6 Jun 2019. [read post]
15 Jul 2019, 1:00 am by Matrix Legal Support Service
Gilham v Ministry of Justice, heard 5-6 Jun 2019. [read post]
14 Feb 2021, 4:45 pm by INFORRM
On the same day HHJ Lewis handed down a judgment in the case of Gilham v Mirror Group Newspapers & anr. [read post]
20 Nov 2009, 6:00 pm
(IP Osgoode) US Trade Marks & Domain Names – Decisions 9th Circuit remands cybersquatting case to Western District: Lahoti v Vericheck (Seattle Trademark Lawyer) [read post]
22 Jul 2019, 1:00 am by Matrix Legal Support Service
Gilham v Ministry of Justice, heard 5-6 Jun 2019. [read post]
21 Jun 2020, 4:10 pm by INFORRM
Using Data and Respecting Users,, Communications of the ACM, 2020, Marshall W. [read post]
14 Sep 2020, 1:26 am by INFORRM
” There was a post about the case on the Inforrm Blog by Hugh Tomlinson QC “Case Law: R (on the application of Bridges) v Chief Constable of South Wales, Police use of “automatic facial recognition technology unlawful”. [read post]