Search for: "State v. Longmore" Results 1 - 20 of 54
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
7 May 2014, 1:00 am by Thaddeus Mason Pope, J.D., Ph.D.
In January, I blogged that the UK Court of Appeal agreed to hear the case of Tracey v. [read post]
8 Dec 2011, 8:39 pm by Simon Gibbs
In AEI Ltd v Phonographic Performance Limited [1999] 1 WLR 1507, Lord Woolf MR stated: “…it is no longer necessary for a party to have acted unreasonably or improperly to be deprived of his costs of a particular issue on which he has failed.” [read post]
18 May 2021, 9:25 am by Robbie Stern
On 10 May 2021, the Supreme Court heard the appeal in R (Majera) (formerly SM (Rwanda)) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (“SSHD”). [read post]
22 Feb 2013, 3:59 am
 Kitchin LJ giving the leading judgment, with which Moses LJ and Longmore LJ agreed in the traditional formula, analysed each criticism of the judge's findings, and in each case upheld the first instance judgment. [read post]
20 Jun 2007, 5:14 am
In Cream v Banerjee Lord Nicholls addressed this provision and said it demanded flexibility in its application. [read post]
4 Nov 2014, 8:52 am by Lauren Wood, Olswang LLP
This was stated as the amount of the participation plus accrued interest up to the Settlement Date. [read post]
29 Jul 2016, 2:21 am by Karon Monaghan QC
Lord Justice Longmore reminded us in Rights of Women that, “legal aid is one of the hallmarks of a civilised society”. [read post]
17 Jun 2010, 3:41 pm by David Smith
If we consider the ruling of Longmore LJ in the Court of Appeal decision in UK Housing Alliance v Francis (which we discussed here) he states that the Act contains a "pervading reference to money 'paid' by the tenant to the landlord, 'received' by the landlord and 'repayable' by the landlord to the tenant". [read post]
17 Jun 2010, 3:41 pm by David Smith
If we consider the ruling of Longmore LJ in the Court of Appeal decision in UK Housing Alliance v Francis (which we discussed here) he states that the Act contains a "pervading reference to money 'paid' by the tenant to the landlord, 'received' by the landlord and 'repayable' by the landlord to the tenant". [read post]
14 Nov 2017, 2:00 am by ELLIOT GOLD
If that is right then the test propounded by Longmore LJ [in Hussain v GMC [2014] EWCA Civ 2246] would impose a higher standard than the test which applies to non-medical endeavours. [read post]
26 Jun 2015, 12:30 am
 Floyd LJ has roundly rejected Arnold J's reasoning, stating:58.The difficulty I feel with endorsing this reasoning is as follows. [read post]
16 Jun 2015, 4:24 am by Matthew Perry, Olswang LLP
  He also doubted the reasoning of the trial judge regarding negative declaratory relief being an appropriate remedy, stating that it is “at best, an ungainly remedy”. [read post]
15 Mar 2018, 4:27 am by Dave
  In other words, the question was whether the judgment of Gage LJ in Tetteh v Kingston Upon Thames Royal London Borough Council [2004] EWCA Civ 1775 survived Hotak; ie that it remained correct in asserting that a review decision had to be read as a whole and that there was no reason for the reviewer to go further than stating the test and the overall finding. [read post]
7 Jun 2017, 8:54 am
 The law on added matter was not disputed, having been recently reviewed by Floyd LJ (with Longmore LJ and Lewison LJ both in agreement) in AP Racing Ltd v Alcon Components Ltd [2014] EWCA Civ 40 (reported on by this blog here). [read post]
29 Jun 2015, 9:36 am
 In the brand-new Court of Appeal decision just out - Actavis UK Ltd & Others v Eli Lilly & Company [2015] EWCA Civ 555 (25 June 2015), Lord Justice Floyd (Lords Justices Kitchin and Longmore concurring) disagreed with Arnold J on two main issues. [read post]
30 Apr 2019, 4:57 pm by INFORRM
Tinkler v Ferguson, heard 3 April 2019 (Longmore, Sharp and Bean LJJ) [read post]
30 Jan 2014, 4:47 am
Although the Court of Appeal never suggests this analysis, the case invites comparison with sufficiency cases in which the principle of an inventive concept derived from the specification can have a general application across a claim.This Kat notices that the composition of the Court of Appeal again yokes together two specialist intellectual property judges (Lords Justices Floyd and Lewison) in the panel of three (the other member of the court being Lord Justice Longmore), and that both… [read post]
Lord Clarke repeated a useful quotation of Longmore LJ from Barclays Bank plc v HHY Luxembourg SARL [2010] EWCA Civ 1248: “If a clause is capable of two meanings…it is quite possible that neither meaning will flout common sense.  [read post]
28 Mar 2018, 8:14 am
  As the the Court themselves stated:"We are conscious that in so deciding we are arriving at a conclusion which is different from that of an experienced patent judge. [read post]
4 Dec 2008, 11:54 pm
Barnet raised G v Southwark [2008] EWCA Civ 877, (NL note here), in particular Longmore LJ’s statement that: The truth is that Southwark have decided that G is a resourceful teenager who is capable of sourcing accommodation provided that he is given assistance to do so. [read post]