Search for: "State v. Vaughan" Results 41 - 60 of 137
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
20 Jan 2018, 9:29 pm
United States and Matters of Evidence Before the International Court of Justice Fernando Lusa Bordin, The Nicaragua v. [read post]
26 Jun 2017, 1:00 am by Matrix Legal Support Service
R (HC) v Secretary of State for Works and Pensions & Ors, heard 21-22 Jun 2017. [read post]
4 Jun 2017, 4:48 pm by Omar Ha-Redeye
Although the “neighbour” principle from Donoghue v. [read post]
17 Feb 2017, 1:34 pm by Bill Marler
Beginning in September 2016, several states, CDC, and the FDA investigated a multistate outbreak of foodborne hepatitis A. [read post]
4 Jan 2017, 3:30 pm by Giles Peaker
Vaughan’s witness statement where she states as follows:- “The Gallery has experienced very significant levels of noise on a regular and repeated basis since the works began. [read post]
22 Dec 2016, 7:10 am by Joy Waltemath
Relying on a 1977 case and finding no intervening change in law that might cause it to depart from that interpretation of available remedies, the Fifth Circuit rejected the employee’s arguments that amendments to the FLSA, the position taken by the EEOC, and the transfer of certain ADEA functions from the Secretary of Labor to the EEOC were sufficient to overturn controlling precedent (Vaughan v. [read post]
14 Jun 2016, 12:02 am
Menaker, The Consequences of Corruption in Investor-State Arbitration Alain Pellet, Police Powers or the State’s Right to Regulate Mark Feldman, Denial of Benefits after Plama v. [read post]
27 Jan 2016, 6:11 am by Gabriel Granatstein
In Ma v University of Toronto, an employee’s application was allowed to continue, whereas in Sikorski v Vaughan (City), the employee’s application was dismissed. [read post]
The Supreme Court yesterday handed down judgment in TN, MA and AA (Afghanistan) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2015] UKSC 40, in which the Court held that a breach of the family tracing duty in Regulation 6 of the Asylum Seekers (Reception Conditions) Regulations 2005 does not affect the rule in Ravichandran requiring asylum applications to be decided on the facts existing at the date of decision. [read post]