Search for: "State v. Royal" Results 101 - 120 of 1,658
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
5 Dec 2019, 3:06 pm by luiza
(Tag: International Whistleblowers) Additionally, UK whistleblower protections received a boost in a November 27, 2019, Supreme Court decision (Royal Mail Group Ltd v Jhuti). [read post]
4 Dec 2019, 8:29 pm by Valerie Oosterveld
Royal Dutch Petroleum (United States), Lafarge (France), Lundi Petroleum (Sweden), and Guus Kouwenhoven (Netherlands). [read post]
2 Dec 2019, 6:26 am by Amanda Sanders (UK)
The Supreme Court in the UK has held in the case of Royal Mail Group Ltd v Jhuti that, where the real reason for dismissal is a protected disclosure which has been hidden from the person determining the dismissal, by a person in a position of responsibility, the dismissal is automatically unfair, even where the decision maker relied upon the reason for the dismissal in good faith. [read post]
2 Dec 2019, 4:00 am by Michael C. Dorf
Judge Jackson's opinion is a straightforward application of United States v. [read post]
2 Dec 2019, 3:39 am by Edith Roberts
First up is New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. [read post]
1 Dec 2019, 1:25 pm by Giles Peaker
Royal Borough of Kingston-Upon-Thames v Moss (2019) EWHC 3261 (Ch) Ever since Jones v London Borough of Southwark (2016) EWHC 457 (Ch) (our report), the position on water rates taken as rent by a number of London Councils and Housing Associations under agreements with Thames Water has been conflicted. [read post]
25 Nov 2019, 4:04 am by Matrix Legal Support Service
Royal Mail Group Ltd v Jhuti, heard 12-13 Jun 2019. [read post]
18 Nov 2019, 2:41 am by Matrix Legal Support Service
Royal Mail Group Ltd v Jhuti, heard 12-13 Jun 2019. [read post]
11 Nov 2019, 9:43 am by Matrix Legal Support Service
Royal Mail Group Ltd v Jhuti, heard 12-13 Jun 2019. [read post]
7 Nov 2019, 4:24 pm by INFORRM
Thus far, the press has successfully argued that anything more than self-regulation would reduce them to Pravda-esque publications, doing the bidding of the Nanny state Government that would otherwise regulate them. [read post]
5 Nov 2019, 4:00 am by Malcolm Mercer
Royal College of Dental Surgeons of Ontario[v], professional regulators have been required to take into account and balance competing principles. [read post]
1 Nov 2019, 1:17 am
', Lars Brahms looks at the recent England and Wales High Court decision of Vestel Elektronik Sanayi v HEVC Advance LLC, which raised this question as well as the questions of what the proper basis would be for such a claim, and where this claim might be brought.Trade MarksGuestKat Nedim Malovic examines an intriguing decision from the General Court, which stated that the relevant public's attention is 'average at best' when assessing likelihood of… [read post]
31 Oct 2019, 1:56 pm by Will Baude
[Todd Henderson on the legal status of Eastern Oklahoma] Last year, the Supreme Court heard arguments, and requested extensive supplemental briefing, in Royal v. [read post]
28 Oct 2019, 3:43 am by Matrix Legal Support Service
Royal Mail Group Ltd v Jhuti, heard 12-13 Jun 2019. [read post]
21 Oct 2019, 3:26 am by Matrix Legal Support Service
Royal Mail Group Ltd v Jhuti, heard 12-13 Jun 2019. [read post]
16 Oct 2019, 2:26 am by Peter Groves
In the introduction to his opinion, he comments critically on the state of thelaw. [read post]