Search for: "Short v. City of Birmingham" Results 81 - 100 of 105
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
27 May 2013, 9:28 am by Giles Peaker
Why will become clear.IA, R (on the application of) v City of Westminster Council [2013] EWHC 1273 (QB)This was a combined permission hearing and hearing of an application to extend an interim injunction that the Defendant provide accommodation to the Claimant. [read post]
27 May 2013, 9:28 am by Giles Peaker
Why will become clear.IA, R (on the application of) v City of Westminster Council [2013] EWHC 1273 (QB)This was a combined permission hearing and hearing of an application to extend an interim injunction that the Defendant provide accommodation to the Claimant. [read post]
19 Dec 2017, 5:00 am by John Jascob
Chief Justice Strine dissented, excoriating Duke for its "business strategy … to run the company in a manner that purposely skirted, and in many ways consciously violated, important environmental laws" (City of Birmingham Retirement and Relief System v. [read post]
31 Mar 2019, 11:33 am by Giles Peaker
The High Court held: Any decision on ‘good reason’ was not influenced by the merits of the appeal – Short v Birmingham City Council (2005) EWHC 2112. [read post]
2 Nov 2010, 5:46 pm by Law Lady
BIRMINGHAM POLICE DEPARTMENT, CITY OF, Defendant, BIRMINGHAM, CITY OF, THE, Defendant-Appellee. 11th Circuit.Federal jurisdiction -- Torts -- Removal of state court action to federal court -- Timeliness -- Appellate court need not decide whether defendant's notice of removal was timely in instant case because any error in failing to remand case to state court on ground that notice of removal was untimely would be procedural error and would be insufficient to… [read post]
11 Nov 2012, 4:15 pm by NL
Shortly, properties in Birmingham and Margate are to be used. [read post]
11 Nov 2012, 4:15 pm by NL
Shortly, properties in Birmingham and Margate are to be used. [read post]
23 May 2021, 4:08 pm by INFORRM
He concludes that the broadcaster “fell short of the high standards of integrity and transparency which are its hallmark” (p.322). [read post]
16 Nov 2007, 1:08 am
LarryBalding, Office of the Chief MedicalExaminer, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma(Jan. 31, 2001)........................................................34Burke, Sheila, Tennessee Will Lift Ban onExecutions, Tennessean, May 1, 2007...................18Clinesmith, Sonja, Moans Pierced SilenceDuring Wait, Arkansas Democrat Gazette,Jan. 26, 1992..........................................................29Diel, Stan, State's New Execution ProcedureDetailed, Birmingham News,Oct. 26, … [read post]
1 Jul 2019, 3:16 am by SHG
But in Pleasant Grove, a city of 10,000 people on the western outskirts of Birmingham, the case appears to have caused little controversy. [read post]
15 Dec 2011, 6:41 am by 1 Crown Office Row
As Lord Mance pointed out in Doherty v Birmingham [2009] 1 AC 367, para 126, section 2 of the HRA requires our courts to “take into account” EurCtHR decisions, not necessarily to follow them. [read post]
19 Mar 2012, 3:30 am by INFORRM
The Independent has a short report here and the Hansard transcript is here. [read post]
1 Jan 2023, 10:16 am by Giles Peaker
As well as naming and shaming Orbit Housing, Lambeth Council and Birmingham City Council, the announcement says: In a letter to the Law Society, Citizens Advice, and Housing Law Practitioners Association today, Michael Gove has urged solicitors to tell social housing tenants that the Ombudsman should be the first route for reporting complaints with their landlord – and that it is unacceptable for landlords to let legal proceedings get in the way of repairs. [read post]
6 Oct 2014, 2:01 pm by Giles Peaker
(c) They had rather relied on the decision of the Court of Appeal in Burnip v Birmingham City Council  [2013] PTSR 117. [read post]
18 Apr 2010, 8:59 am by Tom Goldstein
I am also taking the short-term view, looking at only how Justice Stevens’ successor might vote differently from him in close cases. [read post]
26 Aug 2022, 10:43 am by INFORRM
But again, since in practice in speech-based cases an applicant is already required by s.12(2) HRA to demonstrate exceptional reasons why the respondent should not be notified before the court exceptionally grants an injunction or similar relief against someone who has not been notified of the application – see the Master of the Rolls’ Practice Guidance: Interim Non-Disclosure Orders [2012] 1 WLR 1003, at paras.5 and 18-23, and Birmingham City Council v Afsar… [read post]