Search for: "Qazi v. Qazi"
Results 1 - 20
of 53
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
20 Sep 2020, 3:06 pm
United States v. [read post]
28 Jan 2007, 1:56 pm
The House of Lords decision in Kay v Lambeth [2006] UKHL 10 addressed Human Rights defences to possession claims, attempting to unify Harrow v Qazi [2004] 1 AC and the subsequent European Court judgement in Connors v United Kingdom [2004] 40 EHRR 189. [read post]
6 May 2009, 1:39 pm
Defence Estates v L and another, High Court (Administrative Court, Collins J, 5.5.09) [2009] All ER (D) 20 (May) is - potentially - quite an important case on the ongoing Qazi/Kay/Doherty/Connors/McCann/Cosic debate about the role of Article 8 in possession proceedings. [read post]
8 Nov 2010, 3:18 am
Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) C, R v [2010] EWCA Crim 2578 (04 November 2010) Qazi & Anor, R v [2010] EWCA Crim 2579 (04 November 2010) Court of Appeal (Civil Division) HHY Luxembourg Sarl & Anr v Barclays Bank Plc & Ors [2010] EWCA Civ 1248 (22 October 2010) High Court (Queen’s Bench Division) Eurocall Ltd v Energis Communications Ltd & Anor [2010] EWHC 2790 (QB) (04 November 2010) Jaison Property Development Co Ltd… [read post]
17 Sep 2020, 11:04 am
Qazi, No. 18-10483 (9-17-20)(Hunsaker w/Cook & Wardlaw). [read post]
26 May 2011, 2:14 pm
The title was a reference to a comment of Collins J during the course of discussions after his judgment that three House of Lords' decisions (Qazi, Kay & Doherty) had "left the law frankly in something of a mess". [read post]
26 May 2011, 2:14 pm
The title was a reference to a comment of Collins J during the course of discussions after his judgment that three House of Lords' decisions (Qazi, Kay & Doherty) had "left the law frankly in something of a mess". [read post]
8 Jul 2014, 4:00 am
In Madan v. [read post]
27 Jan 2009, 3:27 am
One of the points in that appeal had been whether or not Qazi (and Monk) needed to be reconsidered in light of the decision of the European Court of Human Rights in Connors v UK 40 EHRR 189. [read post]
27 Jan 2009, 3:27 am
One of the points in that appeal had been whether or not Qazi (and Monk) needed to be reconsidered in light of the decision of the European Court of Human Rights in Connors v UK 40 EHRR 189. [read post]
6 May 2015, 8:11 am
In LB Harrow v Qazi [2003] UKHL 43; [2004] 1 AC 983; [2003] HLR 75 (a joint tenancy/notice to quit case), the House of Lords held that there was no violation of Art 8 where the law affords an unqualified right to possession on proof that the tenancy had been terminated. [read post]
30 Jun 2010, 3:24 pm
After a tour of Dixon, Husband and, most importantly, Harrow LBC v Qazi [2004] 1 AC 983, the Court held that although the rule in Monk predated the incorporation of the ECHR into English law, Qazi was to be taken as binding on the proposition that the rule in Monk was not incompatible. [read post]
30 Jun 2010, 3:24 pm
After a tour of Dixon, Husband and, most importantly, Harrow LBC v Qazi [2004] 1 AC 983, the Court held that although the rule in Monk predated the incorporation of the ECHR into English law, Qazi was to be taken as binding on the proposition that the rule in Monk was not incompatible. [read post]
15 Jul 2010, 2:52 pm
However, Mr H also argued the recent run of ECtHR case law (Cosi v Croatia Application 28261/06, Paulic v Croatia Application 3572/06 [links to our reports]) and that this marked a move beyond the House of Lords decision in Harrow LBC v Qazi (2004) 1 AC 983, such that it was seriously arguable that the rule was incompatible despite Qazi. [read post]
15 Jul 2010, 2:52 pm
However, Mr H also argued the recent run of ECtHR case law (Cosi v Croatia Application 28261/06, Paulic v Croatia Application 3572/06 [links to our reports]) and that this marked a move beyond the House of Lords decision in Harrow LBC v Qazi (2004) 1 AC 983, such that it was seriously arguable that the rule was incompatible despite Qazi. [read post]
4 Nov 2010, 10:45 pm
It is true that this marks an important departure from the three relatively recent cases where the House of Lords held that it was not open to a residential occupier, against whom possession was being sought by a local authority, to raise a proportionality argument under article 8: Harrow London Borough Council v Qazi [2003] UKHL 43; [2004] 1 AC 983, Kay v Lambeth London Borough Council [2006] UKHL 10; , and Doherty v Birmingham City Council [2008]… [read post]
13 May 2008, 1:19 pm
The Court of Appeal held - after the decision on Qazi v Harrow [2003] UKHL 43 - that there was no Art 8 defence to the lawful possession proceedings. [read post]
14 Sep 2010, 7:46 am
In EEOC v. [read post]
22 Sep 2010, 10:00 pm
The Supreme Court is considering the issue in Manchester CC v Pinnock, in which it heard oral argument earlier this year but in which written submissions on the effect of the decision in Kay v UK have been invited, and three other cases, Hounslow LBC v Powell, Leeds CC v Hall and Frisby v Birmingham CC, have been listed in the Supreme Court in late November raising the same or overlapping issue. [read post]
30 Sep 2013, 8:11 am
See Saunders v. [read post]
