Search for: "State v. Royal" Results 61 - 80 of 1,845
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
11 Jun 2019, 7:57 am by INFORRM
In advance of tomorrow’s eagerly awaited Supreme Court “serious harm” decision in Lachaux v Independent Print, the latest Judicial Statistics show, for the second year running, a substantial increase in the number of issued defamation claims. [read post]
10 Jun 2019, 1:00 am by Matrix Legal Support Service
Paten v Secretary of State for the Home Department; Secretary of State for the Home Department v Shah, heard 7 May 2019. [read post]
4 Jun 2019, 6:00 am by Denise Gan (Toronto)
“Best Interests of the Corporation” – more than solely shareholder interests Bill C-97 aims to consolidate the law on the fiduciary duty of directors and officers by codifying the Supreme Court’s findings in BCE Inc. v. 1976 Debentureholders (BCE). [read post]
23 May 2019, 6:34 am by UKSC Blog
The onus has shifted to the state to justify an interference with a right. [read post]
21 May 2019, 3:53 am by Saskia Hayes, CMS
Saskia also acted for a number of insurers in responding to, and appearing before, the Australian Royal Commission into Misconduct in the Banking, Superannuation and Financial Services Industry. [read post]
19 May 2019, 4:08 pm by Omar Ha-Redeye
These amendments received Royal Assent through Bill C-14 on June 17, 2016, through what is now called Medical Assistance in Dying (MAiD). [read post]
16 May 2019, 3:09 am by tracey
Supreme Court Privacy International, R (on the application of)v Investigatory Powers Tribunal & Ors [2019] UKSC 22 (15 May 2019) DA & Ors, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [2019] UKSC 21 (15 May 2019) Telereal Trillium v Hewitt (Valuation Officer) [2019] UKSC 23 (15 May 2019) Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Anderson v Turning Point Eespro [2019] EWCA Civ 815 (15 May 2019) Merinson v Yukos… [read post]
3 May 2019, 3:05 am by tracey
Court of Appeal (Civil Division) TM (Kenya), R (On the Application Of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2019] EWCA Civ 784 (03 May 2019) The State of the Netherlands v Deutsche Bank AG [2019] EWCA Civ 771 (02 May 2019) High Court (Chancery Division) Media-Saturn Holding GmbH & Ors v Toshiba Information Systems (UK) Ltd & Ors [2019] EWHC 1095 (Ch) (02 May 2019) Rose & Ors v Creativityetc Ltd & Ors [2019] EWHC 1043 (Ch)… [read post]
1 May 2019, 7:51 am
Supreme Court on the basis that US courts lacked jurisdiction in that case (case opinion here: Kiobel v. [read post]
30 Apr 2019, 11:45 am by FM Librarian
If you are not familiar with Open Access, please visit my other blog for an introduction.Green Open Access [info]"The Ambiguous Authority of a ‘Surrogate State’: UNHCR’s Negotiation of Asylum in the Complexities of Migration in Southeast Asia," Revue Européenne des Migrations Internationales (Forthcoming, 2019) - The postprint version of this article is currently under embargo. [read post]
28 Apr 2019, 11:22 am by Giles Peaker
Evans v Fleri (2019) EW Misc 12 (CC) A lesson in drafting from Wales. [read post]
24 Apr 2019, 8:00 am by CEB
However, the California Supreme Court stated years ago in Morillion v Royal Packing Co. (2000) 22 C4th 575 that employees who are subject to the employer’s control while traveling to a worksite on a company-provided bus are entitled to compensation for the travel time. [read post]
24 Apr 2019, 8:00 am by CEB
However, the California Supreme Court stated years ago in Morillion v Royal Packing Co. (2000) 22 C4th 575 that employees who are subject to the employer’s control while traveling to a worksite on a company-provided bus are entitled to compensation for the travel time. [read post]
24 Apr 2019, 3:28 am by Giesela Ruehl
Practical implications of the Supreme Court decision The ruling of the Supreme Court in Vedanta has been already called the“the most important judicial decision in the field of business and human rights since the jurisdictional ruling of the United States Supreme Court in Kiobel v Royal Dutch Petroleum in 2013”. [read post]
23 Apr 2019, 11:34 am by Steven Penney
In the United States, challenges to this exemption under the Fourth Amendment failed, with the Supreme Court holding in United States v White that consent surveillance does not intrude upon a reasonable expectation of privacy. [read post]
22 Apr 2019, 3:06 am by Conor Monighan
Goldscheider v Royal Opera House Covent Garden Foundation: The Court of Appeal rejected a challenge to the High Court’s decision to make the Royal Opera House liable for acoustic shock suffered by the claimant. [read post]