Search for: "PHILLIPS v. CHAMBERS"
Results 1 - 20
of 171
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
8 Dec 2010, 8:10 am
Continuing our series of podcasts on oral argument days, we have two new podcasts below with attorneys who filed briefs on both sides of Chamber of Commerce v. [read post]
23 Feb 2011, 6:59 am
Phillips, who often epresents the Chamber, has said that “except for the solicitor general representing the United States, no single entity has more influence on what cases the Supreme Court decides and how it decides them than the [Chamber’s] National Chamber Litigation Center. [read post]
6 May 2014, 5:57 am
Pixley v. [read post]
13 Feb 2008, 8:10 am
New contact info for me is below, and v-card can be downloaded here - Download michael_c_smith.vcf (copy the file to your computer and then click on - Outlook will recognize then) :Michael C. [read post]
21 Nov 2011, 1:45 am
Lord Phillips, Lord Brown and Lord Dyson all analysed the cases concerning Austrian judgements alongside another strand of ECtHR authority relating to cases from Norway Ringvold v Norway (Application No. 34964/97) and Y v Norway (2003) 41 EHRR 87. [read post]
31 Jul 2015, 10:45 am
See Kaneka Corp. v. [read post]
30 Mar 2024, 5:14 am
[6] Chamber of Commerce v. [read post]
19 Jan 2023, 2:00 pm
” Nautilus, Inc. v. [read post]
1 Feb 2012, 6:18 am
Ms Phillips sought an order that Mr Mulcaire swear an affidavit giving information about the individuals who had instructed him, the interception he was instructed to carry out and other matters. [read post]
16 Oct 2011, 5:14 am
On Monday and Tuesday 17 and 18 October 2011 the Supreme Court (Lords Phillips, Brown, Mance, Clarke and Dyson) will hear the appeal of the defendant, Times Newspapers, against the decision of the Court of Appeal ([2010] EWCA Civ 804) that the publication of an article on 2 June 2006 was not covered by Reynolds privilege. [read post]
16 Oct 2011, 5:14 am
It has been forcefully argued that the decision of the Court of Appeal is inconsistent with the decision of the House of Lords in Jameel v Wall Street Journal ([2007] 1 AC 359). [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]
8 Oct 2013, 3:01 pm
Indeed, it bases its decision to reject Defence arguments on the ECtHR, the Al Khawaja and Tahery v. [read post]
2 Apr 2008, 12:06 pm
Phillips. [read post]
16 Jul 2010, 7:37 am
A (Appellant) v Essex County Council & National Autistic Society (Intervener) [2010] UKSC 33 Supreme Court (Lord Phillips, Lady Hale, Lord Brown, Lord Kerr, Lord Clarke) July 14 2010 The right to education under Article 2 Protocol 1 of the Convention was not breached by the delay in catering for the special educational needs of a child. [read post]
30 Nov 2018, 4:20 am
’” At National Review, John Yoo and James Phillips hope the court will use its decision in American Legion v. [read post]
6 Feb 2014, 4:02 am
It is not necessary, in addition, for the goods at issue to have been the subject, prior to the sale, of an offer for sale or advertising targeting consumers of that State.The Court relied on the earlier Phillips case which the IPKat looked at - not with an entirely happy face - here. [read post]
29 Nov 2010, 6:42 am
Chamber of Commerce of the United States, et al. v. [read post]
26 Feb 2011, 5:24 am
Reports on the approach taken by Gill Phillips as in-house counsel for The Guardian when the newspaper first obtained the military logs and diplomatic cables published on the WikiLeaks website. [read post]
5 Mar 2010, 10:00 am
The Court observed that in this assessment the interests of children were particularly material (Uner v Netherlands (46410/99) (2006) 3 FCR 340 ECHR (Grand Chamber). [read post]
