Search for: "State v. Moorhouse"
Results 1 - 20
of 36
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
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]
4 Feb 2009, 3:03 am
Z T (Kosovo) (Respondent) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Appellant) [2009] UKHL 6 (4 February 2009) Holmes-Moorhouse(FC) (Original Respondent and Cross-appellant) v London Borough of Richmond upon Thames (Original Appellants and Cross-respondents) [2009] UKHL 7 (4 February 2009) Marks and Spencer plc (Appellants) v Her Majesty's Commissioners of Customs and Excise (Respondents) [2009] UKHL [...] [read post]
16 Oct 2007, 2:19 am
Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Austin & Anor v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis [2007] EWCA Civ 989 (15 October 2007) L’Oreal SA & Ors v Bellure NV & Ors [2007] EWCA Civ 968 (10 October 2007) Holmes-Moorhouse v London Borough of Richmond-Upon-Thames [2007] EWCA Civ 970 (10 October 2007) Procter & Gamble Company v Reckitt Benckiser (UK) Ltd [2007] EWCA Civ 936 (10 October 2007) Charman v Orion… [read post]
4 Feb 2009, 8:16 am
The House of Lords Opinions in Holmes-Moorhouse v LB Richmond upon Thames [2009] UKHL 7 were handed down today. [read post]
21 May 2017, 2:42 pm
There was, inevitably, reliance on Lord Neuberger’s ‘warning in Holmes-Moorhouse v Richmond upon Thames London Borough Council [2009] UKHL 7; [2009] 1 WLR 413, paras 46 & 50 that: “47. [read post]
15 Jul 2018, 11:38 am
Holmes-Moorhouse v Richmond-upon-Thames London Borough Council (2009) UKHL 7. [read post]
5 Mar 2015, 1:26 pm
Enfield LBC v Najim (2015) CA (Civ Div) 04/03/2015 [Note on Lawtel and here. [read post]
29 Mar 2010, 5:56 am
This was a matter of substance which, in accordance with the guidance in Holmes-Moorhouse at paragraphs 49 to 51, the reviewing officer should have taken into account. [read post]
8 Nov 2014, 6:55 am
Orin Kerr provided audio of this week’s oral arguments in Klayman v. [read post]
9 Jan 2011, 3:33 pm
It is worth a look not just on the specific issues but as the pre-amble sets out the relevant statute and case law in some detail, including the guidance given in Holmes-Moorhouse v Richmond-upon-Thames BC [2009] UKHL 7 ; [2009] 1 WLR 413 on the approach the court should adopt in interpreting review decision letters. [read post]
9 Jan 2011, 3:33 pm
It is worth a look not just on the specific issues but as the pre-amble sets out the relevant statute and case law in some detail, including the guidance given in Holmes-Moorhouse v Richmond-upon-Thames BC [2009] UKHL 7 ; [2009] 1 WLR 413 on the approach the court should adopt in interpreting review decision letters. [read post]
1 Apr 2012, 4:36 pm
I regarded the appeal as having merit and I also considered that it would give this court the opportunity to give any necessary guidance as to the limits of the application of the observations of Lord Neuberger in Holmes-Moorhouse v. [read post]
1 Apr 2012, 4:36 pm
I regarded the appeal as having merit and I also considered that it would give this court the opportunity to give any necessary guidance as to the limits of the application of the observations of Lord Neuberger in Holmes-Moorhouse v. [read post]
28 Jan 2011, 8:53 am
(at [36]) My suggestion is that, just as the Holmes-Moorhouse paragraphs pop up in practically all local authority skeleton arguments, this paragraph is likely to be in most appellants. [read post]
12 Nov 2013, 6:00 am
In Denver Area Educational Telecommunications Consortium, Inc. v. [read post]
10 Nov 2013, 7:38 am
London Borough of Wandsworth v NJ [2013] EWCA Civ 1373NJ applied as homeless to Wandsworth. [read post]
10 Nov 2013, 7:38 am
London Borough of Wandsworth v NJ [2013] EWCA Civ 1373NJ applied as homeless to Wandsworth. [read post]
20 Apr 2012, 1:22 am
It appears to him that this decision finally rids us of University of New South Wales v Moorhouse [1975] HCA 26, one of the world's all-time worst copyright decisions in which it was held that, by making available a photocopy machine in its library for the use of students, a university was liable for authorising copyright infringement. [read post]
6 Nov 2011, 7:50 am
If that were the intention, one would have expected it to have been stated expressly. [read post]
6 Nov 2011, 7:50 am
If that were the intention, one would have expected it to have been stated expressly. [read post]
