Search for: "State v. Baros" Results 1 - 20 of 114
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
19 Dec 2014, 9:04 am by Katharine Alexander, Olswang LLP
In the interview, Lady Hale also stated her view on prenuptial agreements and stuck by her decision from Radmacher v Granatino in 2010 in which she was the only judge out of the nine-judge panel to oppose enforcing the prenuptial agreement which was the subject matter of the case. [read post]
28 Jan 2011, 8:53 am by Dave
Baroness Hale made clear that the question for the local authority (following on from Birmingham CC v Ali – our note here) is essentially about the future, ie the probability of the acts continuing in the future (“This is the limiting factor.  [read post]
2 Jul 2009, 12:26 pm
Baroness Hale states that the phrase ‘would be reasonable for him to continue to occupy’ looks to the future as well as describing a current state. [read post]
4 Feb 2009, 10:37 am
Not for the first time, Nearly Legal has drawn my attention to the case of Holmes-Moorhouse v LB Richmond upon Thames, this time as it reaches the House of Lords. [read post]
18 Nov 2013, 2:47 am by Dr Jeremias Prassl
Wider Implications The proceedings in Hook v British Airways and Stott v Thomas Cook have already attracted significant attention from the Equality and Human Rights Commission; with the Secretary of State acting as a further intervener. [read post]
3 Jan 2017, 12:00 am by Thomas J. Bean and Christine A. Gaddis
From December 5 to December 8, 2016, the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom heard argument in the case of Secretary of State v. [read post]
From December 5 to December 8, 2016, the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom heard argument in the case of Secretary of State v. [read post]
11 Jun 2015, 4:34 am by Christopher Brown, Matrix
Lord Sumption, referring to Lord Hoffmann’s speech in Matadeen v Pointu [1999] 1 AC 98 and that of Baroness Hale in Ghaidan v Godin-Mendoza [2004] 2 AC 557, stated that the principle of equality was “not a principle special to the jurisprudence of the European Union. [read post]
7 Aug 2015, 4:10 am
 * Baroness Neville-Rolfe DBE CMG is the Baroness in question, being Parliamentary Under Secretary of State at the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills and Minister for Intellectual Property. [read post]
18 Dec 2008, 7:37 am
The much-anticipated judgment in MacLeod v MacLeod [2008] UKPC 64 has now been delivered by the Privy Council, and the decision was not as all had expected. [read post]
24 Nov 2011, 7:51 am by Stephanie Smith, Arden Chambers.
Applying Stack and Oxley v Hiscock [2004] EWCA Civ 546, the judge at first instance accepted this contention, stating that he had to consider what was just and fair between the parties having regard to the whole course of dealing between them.  [read post]
27 Nov 2015, 3:25 am by Nick Armstrong, Matrix
For these reasons the Court said that the Secretary of State would likely need to redraft her guidance, and in particular the provisions for exceptionally disapplying the rule. [read post]
13 Jul 2017, 9:03 am by MATHEW PURCHASE, MATRIX
The Divisional Court had little difficulty in answering the case stated in the negative. [read post]
30 Jan 2015, 1:27 am by John Enser
: Europe’s creative output is one of its richest resources, and those who want to enjoy it should be able to pay to do so, even when it is only sold in another Member State [but not, apparently, if it is supplied other than for sale? [read post]
9 Nov 2016, 7:02 am by Giles Peaker
MA & Ors, R (on the application of) v The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [2016] UKSC 58R (on the application of Carmichael and Rourke) (formerly known as MA and others) (Appellants) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (Respondent) R (on the application of Daly and others) (formerly known as MA and others) (Appellants) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (Respondent) R (on the application of A)… [read post]
3 Aug 2008, 11:18 am
The lead judgment is by Baroness Hale, who rehearses the history of the NAA and in particular the interaction with immigration law after R v Hammersmith and Fulham London Borough Council, Ex parte M (1997) 30 HLR 10 S.21 now states: Subject to and in accordance with the provisions of this Part of this Act, a local authority may with the approval of the Secretary of State, and to such extent as he may direct shall, make arrangements for providing: (a) residential… [read post]