Search for: "Mccann v. King*"
Results 1 - 20
of 59
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
23 May 2008, 2:41 am
McCann v United Kingdom European Court of Human Rights “A local authority which bypassed the statutory scheme for evicting a tenant, had violated his right to respect for the home, as guaranteed by article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, when the summary procedure used had not provided appropriate procedural safeguards. [read post]
24 Jan 2013, 4:45 pm
Even since McCann v. [read post]
24 Jan 2013, 4:45 pm
Even since McCann v. [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]
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]
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]
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]
7 Oct 2013, 5:15 am
Kensington and Chelsea LBC; R (McCann) v. [read post]
28 Apr 2007, 3:37 pm
McCann, 2007 U.S. [read post]
23 Dec 2009, 5:12 am
We've been a bit slow on this one, but R v Horncastle [2009] UKSC 14 offers further light on the quarter pounder v royale with cheese debate, which has occupied much of our time this year. [read post]
23 Dec 2009, 5:12 am
We've been a bit slow on this one, but R v Horncastle [2009] UKSC 14 offers further light on the quarter pounder v royale with cheese debate, which has occupied much of our time this year. [read post]
9 Jun 2009, 10:10 am
Whilst the test of “necessity” under s.1(1)(b) Crime and Disorder Act 1998, is one of judgment (Lord Steyn in R (McCann) v Manchester Crown Court [2002] UKHL 39; [2003] 1 AC 787) there would be nothing wrong with giving courts some guidance as to when it would be appropriate to consider exercising that judgment, or the procedure to be adopted. [read post]
20 Jul 2010, 3:07 pm
United Kingdom (1996) on "diplomatic assurances" and torture, and the more recent Saadi v. [read post]
6 Mar 2008, 10:01 pm
" In its judgment in McCann and Others v. [read post]
26 May 2011, 2:14 pm
In Kay, the question was: "Did the applicants have the opportunity to have the proportionality of their evictions determined by an independent tribunal in light of the relevant principles under Article 8 (McCann v. the United Kingdom, no. 19009/04, 13 May 2008)? [read post]
26 May 2011, 2:14 pm
In Kay, the question was: "Did the applicants have the opportunity to have the proportionality of their evictions determined by an independent tribunal in light of the relevant principles under Article 8 (McCann v. the United Kingdom, no. 19009/04, 13 May 2008)? [read post]
6 Mar 2012, 5:51 am
The Sixth Circuit recently in Andler v. [read post]
4 Nov 2010, 10:45 pm
The Supreme Court acknowledged - and this is an important acknowledgement that suggests the law has not moved quite so radically on from the House of Lords position in Qazi, that it will only be in “exceptional” cases that article 8 proportionality would even arguably give a right to continued possession where the applicant has no right under domestic law to remain: McCann v UK 47 EHRR 913, para 54. [read post]
4 Nov 2010, 12:53 am
The ECHR in McCann v UK (see our notes here and here) preferred Lord Bingham's approach. [read post]
