Search for: "Parkes v. Parkes" Results 1 - 20 of 17,423
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
South Korea, a case claiming the Carbon Neutrality Act violates the Constitution; and Min-A Park v South Korea, a case filed in 2023 against the alleged failure of the South Korean government to respect fundamental rights. [read post]
19 May 2024, 10:13 pm by INFORRM
On Thursday 16 May 2024 there was an injunction application in the privacy case of Department for Education v Hercules KB-2024-000389 On the same day, judgment was handed down in De Azavedo Camacho v OCS Group UK Ltd [2024] EWHC 1164 (KB) by Linden J. [read post]
In its verdict, the top court overturned the decision of the KMC to acquire private land at Narkeldanga North Road to construct a public park. [read post]
17 May 2024, 1:07 pm by John Ross
This week the Tenth Circuit vacates that opinion and requests supplemental briefing on how the Supreme Court's recent decision in Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts, Inc. v. [read post]
14 May 2024, 1:22 pm by Unreported Opinions
King provided a false identity to the […] The post BRIAN KING v. [read post]
13 May 2024, 4:50 am by Franklin C. McRoberts
” Commentary In Park v Song (61 Misc 3d 1047 [Sup Ct, NY County 2018]), Manhattan Commercial Division Justice Schechter ruled as a “question of first impression” that a shareholder suing derivatively on behalf of a corporation cannot appear pro se, only through counsel. [read post]
13 May 2024, 12:57 am by INFORRM
On Thursday 16 May 2024 there will be an injunction application in the privacy case of Department for Education v Hercules KB-2024-000389 Reserved judgements Harrison v Cameron, heard 26 March 2024 (Steyn J) BW Legal Services Limited v Trustpilot,  heard 7 March 2024 (HHJ Lewis) Unity Plus Healthcare Limited v Clay and others,  heard 1 March 2024 (HHJ Lewis) Vince v Associated Newspapers, heard 19 February 2024 (HHJ Lewis) Pacini… [read post]
10 May 2024, 9:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
Although this Court's review is limited to reviewing facts contained in the record (see Matter of Jorling v Adirondack Park Agency, 214 AD3d 98, 101-102 [3d Dept 2023]), we find that respondents' footnote was a permissible statement and argument encompassing the applicable statutory and regulatory authorities governing the handling of an incomplete permit application (see Reed v New York State Elec. [read post]
10 May 2024, 9:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
Although this Court's review is limited to reviewing facts contained in the record (see Matter of Jorling v Adirondack Park Agency, 214 AD3d 98, 101-102 [3d Dept 2023]), we find that respondents' footnote was a permissible statement and argument encompassing the applicable statutory and regulatory authorities governing the handling of an incomplete permit application (see Reed v New York State Elec. [read post]
10 May 2024, 12:04 am by Katherine Morris
On 8 March 2024, Judge Russell SC delivered judgment in SafeWork NSW v Miller Logistics Pty Ltd; SafeWork NSW v Mitchell Doble [2024] NSWDC 58 (Doble). [read post]