Search for: "McCann v. McCann"
Results 81 - 100
of 378
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
4 Oct 2019, 6:00 am
McCann. [read post]
10 Jun 2010, 6:48 am
Court of Appeal (Criminal Divison) Dhorajiwala, R v [2010] EWCA Crim 1237 (09 June 2010) Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Morge, R (on the application of) v Hampshire County Council [2010] EWCA Civ 608 (10 June 2010) Beechwood Birmingham Ltd v Hoyer Group UK Ltd [2010] EWCA Civ 647 (10 June 2010) High Court (Queen’s Bench Division) Baxter & Ors v McCann [2010] EWHC 1330 (QB) (10 June 2010) Source: www.bailii.org [read post]
30 Jul 2008, 9:55 pm
Their Lordships declined to vary or amend Kay v Lambeth in the light of this appeal or the last minute submissions on McCann v UK. [read post]
20 Apr 2008, 10:01 pm
In McCann v. [read post]
27 Jan 2009, 3:27 am
The ‘new’ factor in the present case was the decision of the European Court of Human Rights in McCann v UK 19009/04. [read post]
27 Jan 2009, 3:27 am
The ‘new’ factor in the present case was the decision of the European Court of Human Rights in McCann v UK 19009/04. [read post]
26 Sep 2010, 10:01 pm
McCann v. [read post]
1 Mar 2013, 1:58 pm
The recent case of McCann v. [read post]
28 Sep 2009, 3:11 pm
Some serious reading first on American Needle, Inc. v. [read post]
15 Nov 2012, 2:54 pm
., v. [read post]
8 Aug 2010, 3:09 pm
Of interest to housing lawyers are the JCHR findings and the Government response on McCann and Kay v UK, Connors and implementation of s.318 Housing and Regeneration Act 2008, and Schedule 15 Housing and Regeneration Act 2008 in relation to the incompatibility in Morris v Westminster CC [2005] EWCA Civ 1184. [read post]
8 Aug 2010, 3:09 pm
Of interest to housing lawyers are the JCHR findings and the Government response on McCann and Kay v UK, Connors and implementation of s.318 Housing and Regeneration Act 2008, and Schedule 15 Housing and Regeneration Act 2008 in relation to the incompatibility in Morris v Westminster CC [2005] EWCA Civ 1184. [read post]
19 Jul 2023, 2:15 am
The principal issues on this appeal are as follows: Whether the Court of Appeal erred in law by distinguishing and declining to follow the decision of the House of Lords in R (McCann) v Crown Court at Manchester [2003] 1 AC 787 (“McCann”) that the criminal standard of proof should be applied in proceedings in respect of an anti-social behaviour order under section 1, Crime and Disorder Act 1998 (“the 1998 Act”), and in failing to apply that standard… [read post]
13 May 2008, 1:19 pm
As many people have already emailed me to tell me (alright, four people, all of them lovely), McCann v United Kingdom 19009/04 was handed down today. [read post]
16 Dec 2011, 10:49 am
This decision is in line with McCann v. [read post]
25 Sep 2010, 9:16 am
In McCann v UK, which preceded Cosic, the ECtHR not surprisingly found that the rule in Hammersmith and Fulham LBC v Monk similarly breached Article 8 because of the lack of procedural safeguards (see especially paras [53]-[54]). [read post]
1 Jun 2010, 5:47 pm
This week on the legal-affairs podcast Lawyer2Lawyer, we discuss the Supreme Court’s May 24 opinion in American Needle v. [read post]
17 Dec 2008, 12:13 am
The defence was initially based on, as the Court of Appeal puts it, ‘the hope’ that Doherty in the Lords would adopt McCann v UK. [read post]
3 Dec 2009, 9:21 am
Case Name: Motley v. [read post]
9 Oct 2009, 12:26 pm
McCann did not diagnose Petitioner with alcohol or drug dependency. [read post]
