Search for: "London v. State" Results 241 - 260 of 4,082
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
23 Jan 2023, 10:30 pm by Patrick Bracher (ZA)
United States Fire Insurance Co and Others v Icicle Seafoods Inc, case no. 22-35024 in the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (https://cases.justia.com/federal/appellate-courts/ca9/22-35024/22-35024-2022-12-06.pdf? [read post]
23 Jan 2023, 5:57 am by Mukarrum Ahmed
These cases demonstrate clearly the change of position as compared with Allianz v West Tankers and Turner v Grovit, respectively. [read post]
22 Jan 2023, 4:35 pm by INFORRM
On the same day, judgment was handed down in Piepenbrock v London School of Economics and Political Science & Ors [2023] EWHC 52 (KB) by Heather Williams J. [read post]
18 Jan 2023, 11:41 am by Dan Lopez
I’m going to toss the baton from New York to London and you can introduce our topics and I will turn it over to you. [read post]
11 Jan 2023, 9:51 am by Karina Lytvynska
They also state that they expect the app’s users to follow the guidelines to receive the best possible results. [read post]
8 Jan 2023, 10:59 am by Giles Peaker
Secondly, via Williams v London Borough of Southwark (2000) All ER (D) 377, a commission could be retained where it was a payment for work done. [read post]
8 Jan 2023, 7:35 am
”[2]For Marxist-Leninist and many post-colonial states, it is described as “Building a Community with a Shared Future for Mankind and Global Human Rights Governance. [read post]
15 Dec 2022, 2:58 am by INFORRM
While the term is now well known – coined by two American academics in the late 1980s – only the United States (in some 33 states), the three largest provinces in Canada (British Columbia, Ontario and Quebec), and the Australian Central Territory are lauded for having anti-SLAPP legislation. [read post]
12 Dec 2022, 7:23 am by INFORRM
Hacked Off reminds readers that the Leveson system is not “state approved”. [read post]
11 Dec 2022, 9:53 am by Giles Peaker
The Court of Appeal considered itself bound by R (Morris) v London Rent Assessment Committee (2002) EWCA Civ 276 in this, as authority that: If a notice is addressed to A (by his correct name) and sent to A’s proper address, it cannot be treated as a notice given to B. [read post]