Search for: "State v. Belcher"
Results 41 - 60
of 75
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
13 Feb 2012, 8:55 am
It is argued, in particular, that the United Kingdom Supreme Court’s recently-articulated approach to written agreements in the employment law context in Autoclenz Ltd v Belcher [2011] UKSC 41 is motivated by a desire to prevent parties from arrogating to themselves (and away from the courts) the power to determine the law: a desire, in other words, to uphold the rule of law. [read post]
12 Feb 2012, 3:20 am
He said: “The key would be to make the cards available only to members of print newsgathering organisations or magazines who have signed up the new body and its code… The public at large would know journalists carrying such cards are bone fide operators committed to a set of standards and a body to who complaints can be made…I think the beauty of the system, the attraction of the system, is it will be the newspaper industry registering and disciplining journalists, not the… [read post]
6 Feb 2012, 2:30 am
Mr Gervase Duffield v The Independent, Clause 1, 01/02/2012; Ms Hayley Quinn v Daily Mail, Clause 1, 01/02/2012; Mr Alex Scott v The Times, Clause 1, 01/02/2012; Mr Alex Scott and Mr James Elliott v The Sun, Clause 1, 01/02/2012; Mrs Jane Clarke v Northwich Guardian, Clause 5, 01/02/2012; Mr Peter Vince-Lindsay v Daily Mail, Clause 1 01/02/2012. [read post]
3 Nov 2011, 7:52 am
2011 WL 5008008, at *3.There’s also Stevens v. [read post]
6 Oct 2011, 1:54 am
State v. [read post]
12 Aug 2011, 8:58 am
The contract expressly stated that the relationship between the parties was that of client and independent contractor. [read post]
3 Aug 2011, 5:40 am
United States v. [read post]
28 Jul 2011, 3:35 am
Supreme Court Autoclenz Ltd v Belcher & Ors [2011] UKSC 41 (27 July 2011) Belmont Park Investments PTY Ltd v BNY Corporate Trustee Services Ltd & Anor [2011] UKSC 38 (27 July 2011) Jivraj v Hashwani [2011] UKSC 40 (27 July 2011) Houldsworth & Anor v Bridge Trustees Ltd & Anor [2011] UKSC 42 (27 July 2011) Lucasfilm Ltd & Ors v Ainsworth & Anor [2011] UKSC 39 (27 July 2011) Court of Appeal (Civil Division) The Newspaper… [read post]
27 Jul 2011, 3:00 am
Their contracts stated they were under no obligation to attend work, although the employment tribunal found as a fact – in practice – they were expected to attend work and provide services personally. [read post]
24 Jul 2011, 9:44 am
R (on the application of Quila and another) (FC) v Secretary of State for the Home Department and R (on the application of Bibi and another) (FC) v Secretary of State for the Home Department, heard 8 – 9 June 2011. [read post]
17 Jul 2011, 9:55 am
Autoclenz Limited v Belcher and others, heard 11 – 12 May 2011. [read post]
10 Jul 2011, 2:02 pm
Autoclenz Limited v Belcher and others, heard 11 – 12 May 2011. [read post]
3 Jul 2011, 4:12 am
Autoclenz Ltd v Belcher & Ors, heard 11 – 12 May 2011. [read post]
26 Jun 2011, 11:27 am
Autoclenz Limited v Belcher and others, heard 11 – 12 May 2011. [read post]
21 Jun 2011, 8:35 am
Introduction The case of Autoclenz Ltd v Belcher & Ors, heard in the Supreme Court on 11 and 12 May 2011, is concerned with the employment status of individuals. [read post]
19 Jun 2011, 10:19 am
Autoclenz Limited v Belcher and others, heard 11 – 12 May 2011. [read post]
12 Jun 2011, 12:59 pm
Autoclenz Ltd v Belcher & Ors, heard 11 – 12 May 2011. [read post]
24 May 2011, 8:05 pm
” State v. [read post]
22 May 2011, 12:00 pm
Autoclenz Limited v Belcher and others, heard 11 – 12 May 2011. [read post]
16 May 2011, 1:13 pm
Autoclenz Limited v Belcher and others, heard 11 – 12 May 2011. [read post]
