Search for: "Reed v. Secretary of State"
Results 21 - 40
of 285
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
19 Mar 2007, 2:06 pm
Reed, the first case regarding "matching" information on registration forms to other databases under... [read post]
7 Feb 2024, 11:00 pm
Term Limits v. [read post]
30 Jan 2012, 4:29 am
Starting on Monday 30 January 2012 are the appeals of PP v Secretary of State for the Home Department, (formerly VV [Jordan]), PP v Secretary of State for the Home Department, W & BB v Secretary of State for the Home Department and Z, G, U & Y v Secretary of State for the Home Department, scheduled for 1.5 days to be heard by Lords Phillips, Brown, Kerr, Dyson and Wilson. [read post]
10 Jul 2017, 2:46 am
Even in the interim with an appeal pending, Richards LJ could not be faulted for according weight to the public interest attached by Parliament to a foreign criminal’s removal because his approach constituted “a natural extension” of Lord Reed’s “great weight” analysis in Ali. [read post]
15 Aug 2010, 7:48 pm
Wa.) last week issued a temporary restraining order to prevent the Washington Secretary of State from releasing names and addresses of supporters of R-71, the referendum measure to overturn Washington's domestic partnership law, until the court... [read post]
24 Aug 2015, 7:31 pm
The decision in Reed v. [read post]
13 Apr 2015, 1:55 am
Lord Reed at [74] – [75] with Lady Hale at [182] and [206]). [read post]
6 Aug 2015, 5:09 am
In the case of Pham (formerly “B2”), Lord Neuberger PSC, Lady Hale DPSC and Lord Mance, Lord Wilson, Lord Sumption, Lord Reed and Lord Carnwath JJSC unanimously dismissed the suspected terrorist’s appeal. [read post]
16 May 2017, 4:30 pm
In the case of R (o.t.a P & others) v. [read post]
7 Dec 2016, 2:11 am
There is no Parliamentary authorisation for the loss of rights in any legislation made by Parliament and, in the absence of this, the appeal should be dismissed. 14:27: Lord Reed suggests “life has moved on from the times of Dicey”. 14:23: Lord Carnworth asks a question about the ‘one-line’ bill which James Eadie QC suggested the government would introduce if it loses the appeal. 14:21: Dominic Chambers QC summarises that the outcome of the… [read post]
24 Aug 2015, 2:31 pm
The decision in Reed v. [read post]
24 Aug 2018, 9:14 am
Observably, art VII(4) of the Protocol provides that where a state made a declaration under art 40(1) or (2) of the Convention extending its application to a territory for whose international relations it was responsible, and then acceded to the Protocol, the declaration should apply to the Protocol also, unless that state notified the Secretary-General to the contrary. [read post]
7 Oct 2022, 1:44 am
There is an unfortunate similarity between the approach of the Government in Craig and the behaviour to the Government in R (on the application of Majera (formerly SM (Rwanda)) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2021] UKSC 46. [read post]
14 May 2017, 1:56 pm
While noting with approval the Court’s 1971 decision in Reed v. [read post]
16 Mar 2012, 8:08 am
Documents only available through HTM links, not as PDFs. 3:00pm Thursday, March 15, 2012 20120112 North Dakota State Board of Higher Education, Petitioner v. [read post]
6 Dec 2016, 1:45 am
Lord Pannick QC says it is no answer for the Government to say that the long title to the 1972 Act “says nothing about withdrawal“. 16:04: Lord Pannick QC refers to the case of Robinson v Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, which he submits supports a “flexible response” to constitutional developments. [read post]
29 Nov 2018, 9:05 am
However, the burden of the submissions resisting the appeal falls to the two interested parties: Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs; Government Communications Headquarters. [read post]
28 Oct 2013, 2:53 am
Listed this morning for half a day in Courtroom 2 is the appeal of Zoumbas v Secretary of State for the Home Department, to be heard by L Hale, L Kerr, L Reed, L Toulson and L Hodge. [read post]
22 Oct 2009, 7:31 am
Reed, Washington Secretary of State, No. 09A356 (Oct. 20, 2009). [read post]
Case Comment: Sadovska & Anor v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Scotland) [2017] UKSC 54
31 Jul 2017, 3:30 am
The Supreme Court It is incumbent on the state to establish any wrongdoing. [read post]
