Search for: "State v. Sheffield" Results 21 - 40 of 127
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
10 Mar 2008, 2:21 am
Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Legal Services Commission v Rasool [2008] EWCA Civ 154 (05 March 2008) Revenue & Customs v Dunwood Travel Ltd [2008] EWCA Civ 174 (07 March 2008) AIC Ltd v Marine Pilot Ltd [2008] EWCA Civ 175 (07 March 2008) Research In Motion UK Ltd v Visto Corporation [2008] EWCA Civ 153 (06 March 2008) City Inn (Jersey) Ltd v Ten Trinity Square Ltd [2008] EWCA Civ 156 (06 March 2008) Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) Bright,… [read post]
7 Nov 2009, 1:50 am
"There have been suggestions, following on from the Sheffield Case (Harvey v. [read post]
6 Oct 2019, 3:48 am by INFORRM
In AAA -v- Rakoff [2019] EWHC 2525 (QB) Mr Justice Nicklin set out the importance of claimants (and their lawyers) setting out a clear and consistent basis for seeking anonymity in civil proceedings. [read post]
24 Jul 2014, 3:50 am by Catherine Rose
    The post Case Comment: R (Nunn) v Chief Constable of Suffolk Constabulary [2014] UKSC 37 appeared first on UKSCBlog. [read post]
10 Oct 2015, 2:15 am by Giles Peaker
Seale v Armitage Residential Ltd A00BY153 (Designated Civil Judge HHJ Robinson, County Court at Sheffield, 1 June 2015) A district judge had struck out T’s tenancy deposit claim on the ground that although L did not protect the deposit within the prescribed period, no cause of action existed because L had protected the deposit (and ended the tenancy) by the time of hearing . [read post]
3 Jul 2012, 3:05 am by Scott Key
For instance, I worked very hard behind the scenes in State v. [read post]
25 Jun 2022, 5:59 am by jonathanturley
At The University of Chicago Law School, Ginsburg stated on the 40th anniversary of Roe v. [read post]
16 Aug 2010, 3:09 am by Jeremy Tyler
” The Sheffield Court turned to the United States Supreme Court decisions in Daubert v. [read post]
2 Mar 2010, 2:53 am by Dave
The application was refused on two grounds: first, "it is not, in the state of English law now, arguable that the unqualified right to possession by a landlord is incompatible with Article 8; or indeed, in the light of Sheffield CC v Smart [2002] HLR 34, with Article 1 Protocol 1 of the Convention" (at [8]); second, the claim was not arguable on the facts of the case in which it appeared to the local authority that the property was vacant, and so could not be… [read post]
2 Mar 2010, 2:53 am by Dave
The application was refused on two grounds: first, "it is not, in the state of English law now, arguable that the unqualified right to possession by a landlord is incompatible with Article 8; or indeed, in the light of Sheffield CC v Smart [2002] HLR 34, with Article 1 Protocol 1 of the Convention" (at [8]); second, the claim was not arguable on the facts of the case in which it appeared to the local authority that the property was vacant, and so could not be… [read post]