Search for: "People v. Kingston" Results 1 - 20 of 60
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
1 Nov 2022, 4:00 am by Deanne Sowter
McLellan v Birbilis In McLellan v Birbilis, 2021 ONSC 7084, Justice Nicole Tellier debunked (again!) [read post]
22 May 2022, 4:08 pm by INFORRM
Data Privacy and Data Protection Google is being sued for allegedly using NHS health data belonging to 1.6 million people without their consent. [read post]
10 Apr 2022, 4:56 pm by INFORRM
The Mishcon de Reya blog also published an article on FoIs last week, explaining the recent decision of Moss v Kingston-on-Thames and The Information Commissioner NJ/2018/0007, in which the High Court held that failure to comply with a FoI notice is contempt of court. [read post]
2 Dec 2021, 6:05 am by INFORRM
Brian Cathcart is Professor of Journalism at Kingston University London This post originally appeared on Byline Investigates and is reproduced with permission and thanks [read post]
29 Aug 2021, 7:14 pm by Omar Ha-Redeye
Kingston Mazda Dealership, and The Customer v. [read post]
15 Apr 2021, 10:51 am by Dennis Crouch
Retroactive Application of IPRs: Security People, Inc. v. [read post]
5 Oct 2020, 10:25 am by Dennis Crouch
Kingston Technology Company, Inc., No. 19-1459. [read post]
8 Sep 2019, 9:43 am by Omar Ha-Redeye
One example of this is in J.I.R.L. v Criminal Injuries Compensation Board, where the Divisional Court reviewed an appeal of a decision by the CICB in relation to the quantum of his claim. [read post]
20 Jun 2019, 6:14 am by Second Circuit Civil Rights Blog
(Halleck is a former client of mine by the way; we sued the City of Kingston in 2008 over a different free speech violation).The 5-4 majority notes that the First Amendment only regulates governmental behavior. [read post]
14 Jun 2019, 4:34 pm by INFORRM
Warby J held that the only safe approach to take is to assume that the readership includes lay people with no special knowledge that would affect the way they read the words complained of. [read post]
3 Sep 2018, 4:00 am by Administrator
The 2018 Ontario Superior Court decision in Kaplan v. [read post]
11 Nov 2017, 2:31 am by INFORRM
The duty is about protecting people from the poisonous and pernicious influence of extremist ideas that are used to legitimise terrorism. [read post]
13 Jul 2017, 8:52 pm by Jim Sedor
“I’ve never worried a whole lot about what people think,&r [read post]
13 Apr 2017, 8:35 am by Yosie Saint-Cyr
In the 2011 matter Kingston (City) v Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 109, Arbitrator Elaine Newman noted the following with respect to Bill 168: “The Bill 168 amendments to the Occupational Health and Safety Act have changed the law of the workplace in a significant way….The theory is that workplace violence is usually foreshadowed. [read post]