Search for: "Rodgers v. State" Results 21 - 40 of 215
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
23 May 2011, 8:44 am by Edward Craven, Matrix Chambers.
This was the riddle that recently occupied a nine-judge panel of the Supreme Court in R (Adams) v Secretary of State for Justice [2011] UKSC 18. [read post]
9 Mar 2017, 11:52 am by Shahram Miri
In a recent unpublished appellate opinion, the parties unfortunately decided against such a route and further litigation ensued.Lough v. [read post]
20 Mar 2011, 5:31 am by Blog Editorial
On Monday 21 and Tuesday 22 March, Lords Hope, Rodger, Brown, Kerr and Dyson will hear the devoluation appeal of Fraser v Her Majesty’s Advocate. [read post]
3 Apr 2011, 11:31 pm by Blog Editorial
Second, on 6 and 7 April 2011, Lords Phillips, Rodger, Walker, Mance and Clarke will hear Jivraj v Hashwani. [read post]
9 Aug 2017, 3:09 am by AIDAN WILLS MATRIX
Lord Rodger was not advancing a legal presumption which applied in all circumstances and, in referring to this passage, Tugendhat J was doing no more than stating that, while some members of the public equate suspicion with guilt, most would not [33]. [read post]
1 May 2013, 10:29 am by Gregory Forman
Two years after the United States Supreme Court reversed the South Carolina Supreme Court in Turner v. [read post]
6 May 2010, 2:30 pm by Erin Miller
The following essay for our thirty-day series on John Paul Stevens is by Rodger D. [read post]
6 Aug 2017, 4:42 pm by INFORRM
Lord Rodger was not advancing a legal presumption which applied in all circumstances and, in referring to this passage, Tugendhat J was doing no more than stating that, while some members of the public equate suspicion with guilt, most would not [33]. [read post]
24 May 2011, 8:40 am by Cathyrn Hopkins, Olswang LLP
As Lord Rodgers stated in his judgment, liability may be established on the basis that [read post]