Search for: "State v. MM"
Results 1 - 20
of 344
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
29 Jul 2010, 1:48 am
Regina (ZO (Somalia)) v Secretary of State for the Home Department; Regina (MM (Burma)) v Same [2010] UKSC 36; [2010] WLR (D) 203 “An asylum seeker who made a new application for asylum after his original application for asylum had finally failed, was entitled to the benefits conferred by the European Directive setting minimum standards for the reception of asylum seekers. [read post]
26 May 2009, 3:17 am
R (MM (Burma) and another) v Secretary of State for the Home Department; R (DT (Eritrea)) v Same [2009] EWCA Civ 442; [2009] WLR (D) 166 “A person whose asylum claim had been finally determined in country A against him or her and who made a subsequent claim for asylum in country A came within the [...] [read post]
23 Dec 2010, 6:59 am
The Montana Supreme Court has issued an Opinion in the following matter: DA 10-0069, 2010 MT 274, MM&I, LLC, a Montana Limited Liability Company, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. [read post]
21 Feb 2012, 2:55 am
MM (Zimbabwe) v Secretary of State for the Home Department: [2012] EWCA Civ 135; [2012] WLR (D) 36 ” ‘Conspicuous unfairness’ was not a free standing ground in an immigration case on which a court could act in the absence of unlawful action on the part of the Home Secretary.” WLR Daily, 24th January 2012 Source: www.iclr.co.uk [read post]
28 Nov 2018, 2:17 am
The Supreme Court by a majority of 4 to 1 (Lord Hughes dissenting) dismissed MM’s appeal. [read post]
12 Sep 2008, 9:07 am
By Jonathan Hunter: In a highly anticipated decision, the Tenth Circuit held this week that the district court had subject matter jurisdiction over a qui tam action filed by an MMS auditor concerning royalty payments on crude oil produced from offshore federal leases. [read post]
21 Jun 2017, 5:31 am
The principle of a MIR per se is not objectionable as the Court states (see Konstantinov v Netherlands cited at para. 84) but the impact of the new threshold is surely a relevant consideration in considering compatibility. [read post]
7 Apr 2016, 8:35 am
ZM v Secretary of State for the Home Department; HA (Iraq) v Secretary of State for the Home Department, heard 12-14 January 2016. [read post]
1 May 2014, 10:01 am
In Mauvais v Herissee, 2014 WL 1454452 (D.Mass.)) the district court granted the petition of Manel Mauvais for the return of his two minor children to Canada. [read post]
16 Dec 2013, 8:51 am
In Mauvais v. [read post]
22 Jun 2023, 12:09 pm
and Fegley v. [read post]
11 Nov 2009, 8:36 am
Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) Evans, R v [2009] EWCA Crim 2243 (04 November 2009) Court of Appeal (Civil Division) MM (Iran) v Secretary of State for Home Department [2009] EWCA Civ 1167 (10 November 2009) Choudhary & Ors v Bhatter & Ors [2009] EWCA Civ 510 (11 November 2009) Whittle Movers Ltd v Hollywood Express Ltd [2009] [...] [read post]
18 May 2012, 3:48 am
Court of Appeal (Civil Division) MM and AO (A Child), R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2012] EWCA Civ 668 (18 May 2012) Maswaku v Westminster City Council [2012] EWCA Civ 669 (18 May 2012) El Goure v The Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea [2012] EWCA Civ 670 (18 May 2012) High Court (Queen’s Bench Division) Wolman v Weller [2012] EWHC 1292 (QB) (18 May 2012) High Court (Chancery Division)… [read post]
22 Feb 2017, 2:18 am
However the Immigration Rules and the Immigration Directorate Instruction on family migration unlawfully failed to take proper account of the Secretary of State’s duty in respect of the welfare of children under the Borders, Citizenship and Immigration Act 2009, s 55. [read post]
18 Jul 2019, 2:16 am
The Supreme Court held that Secretary of State’s insistence on it being necessary for the supporter to be present at the engagement would stand in the way of means of support which do not involve physical presence and would be likely to impede attempts to improve the claimant’s abilities to handle matters in future with less support. [read post]
21 Jan 2019, 9:00 pm
In Stokeling v United States, 586 U.S. ____ (2019), the U.S. [read post]
19 Feb 2020, 6:10 pm
Starlites Tech Corp. v. [read post]
26 Jun 2014, 1:32 am
Background Last week the Supreme Court handed down judgment in R (T) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2014] UKSC 35. [read post]
21 Jun 2017, 5:31 am
Evidence from the Government revealed that the MIR formed “part of an overall programme of reform intended to reduce net migration and restore public confidence in the immigration system” although it was not stated to be the primary objective of the reform. [read post]
23 Jan 2013, 12:32 pm
The outcome in Rexnord v. [read post]
