Search for: "Robinson v. Hill" Results 1 - 20 of 148
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
The Supreme Court granted permission to appeal in Robinson v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire [2014] EWCA Civ 15 in order to re-examine the Hill immunity and liability for the police in negligence. [read post]
3 Jun 2018, 10:00 pm by Karen Tani
 Virginians Oliver Hill and Spottswood Robinson initiated and argued one of the five cases that combined into the landmark Brown v. [read post]
24 Dec 2013, 5:45 am by Barry Sookman
William Hill (Football), Ltd., [1964] 1 All E.R. 465 (H.L.), at p. 481, per Lord Pearce. [read post]
5 Aug 2007, 7:32 am
He was the lead lawyer on Davis v. [read post]
12 Feb 2018, 3:40 am by IAN SKELT
It has never been in dispute that the police can be liable in tort to those injured as a direct result of acts or omissions by the police: see, for example Hill v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police [1989] AC 53, [59B-C]. [read post]
8 Feb 2018, 3:39 am by Matrix Legal Support Service
The case of Hill v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire [1989] AC 53 is not authority for the proposition that the police enjoy a general immunity from suit in respect of anything done by them in the course of investigating or preventing crime. [read post]
11 Mar 2016, 6:40 am by The Federalist Society
To discuss the case, we have Erik Zimmerman, who is an attorney with Robinson Bradshaw in Chapel Hill, North Carolina. [read post]
26 Jun 2018, 3:31 pm by Jon Levitan
Other coverage at Bloomberg comes from Kimberly Robinson, who reports on Justice Thomas’ concurrence. [read post]
10 Feb 2014, 4:00 am by Martin Kratz
Of interest, the Supreme Court indicated that the cap on non-pecuniary losses (e.g. psychological suffering) in the Andrews trilogy cases was not applicable in cases that do not stem from bodily injury such as defamation (citing Hill v. [read post]