Search for: "Thames v. State"
Results 61 - 80
of 119
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
2 Sep 2019, 5:52 am
The appellants had relied upon the view of May J in Summers v London Borough of Richmond Upon Thames [2018] EWHC 782 (Admin), [2018] 1 WLR 4729, at [24], that the expression “those in the locality” in section 59 of the 2014 Act “must be read to include those who regularly visit or work in the locality, in addition to residents”. [read post]
7 Jan 2018, 1:51 pm
In my view, he is correct that there is insufficient here arguably to amount to an assumption of care so as to satisfy the approach in X v Hounslow or Darby v Richmond-upon-Thames. [read post]
3 Feb 2007, 3:15 pm
State v. [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]
12 Jun 2023, 12:53 am
The ICO have reprimanded the Thames Valley Police for publishing the details of witnesses to a person suspected of a crime, forcing the witness to have to relocate. [read post]
9 Jan 2012, 12:27 am
Dobson & Ors v Thames Water Utilities Ltd (No 2) [2011] EWHC 3253 (TCC) (08 Dece…. [read post]
29 Oct 2020, 12:21 pm
Finally, notes on Z & Anor, R (on the application of) v Hackney London Borough Council & Anor; Gateway Housing Association v Personal Representatives of Ali & Anor; Royal Borough of Kingston-Upon-Thames v Moss and other cases will be coming soon. [read post]
3 Feb 2013, 3:57 pm
”And finally, the usual passage from Holmes-Moorhouse v Richmond-upon-Thames LBC [2009] UKHL 7 [at 51] is aired:a decision can often survive despite the existence of an error in the reasoning advanced to support it. [read post]
3 Feb 2013, 3:57 pm
”And finally, the usual passage from Holmes-Moorhouse v Richmond-upon-Thames LBC [2009] UKHL 7 [at 51] is aired:a decision can often survive despite the existence of an error in the reasoning advanced to support it. [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
Richmond upon Thames London Borough Council [2009] 1 WLR 413, at [50] and [51].Soon after, Lewisham decided not to contest the appeal, on the stated (and very familiar) grounds that the decision was “based on the taking of an economic view of the likely costs of resisting the appeal”. [read post]
1 Apr 2012, 4:36 pm
Richmond upon Thames London Borough Council [2009] 1 WLR 413, at [50] and [51].Soon after, Lewisham decided not to contest the appeal, on the stated (and very familiar) grounds that the decision was “based on the taking of an economic view of the likely costs of resisting the appeal”. [read post]
18 Mar 2008, 12:26 pm
State of Indiana (NFP) Derele Thames v. [read post]
18 Jan 2012, 1:40 am
Dobson & Ors v Thames Water Utilities Ltd (No 2) [2011] EWHC 3253 (TCC) (08 December 2011) December 28, 2011 Thames Water caused nuisance and breached human rights of residents living next to sewage works who suffered odour and mosquitoes over many years. [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]
30 Jun 2017, 11:52 am
Arguably, the effect on claimants of the band of reasonable responses test has been ameliorated by decisions such as Newbound v Thames Water Utilities Ltd relying on s 98(4)(b) to emphasis the test’s practical limits: The “band of reasonable responses” has been a stock phrase in employment law for over thirty years, but the band is not infinitely wide. [read post]
25 May 2018, 12:15 pm
Jeff Benedict is a prominent reporter and author of Little Pink House, an excellent journalistic account of the events leading up to Kelo v. [read post]
26 Mar 2023, 8:53 am
Tapper v Royal Borough of Kingston upon Thames (unreported, 4 January 2022, County Court at Central London, HHJ Parfitt) This was a section 204 Housing Act 1996 (‘HA 1996’) appeal against a review decision finding that the Appellant was intentionally homeless. [read post]
2 Dec 2013, 4:00 am
Consider it a replay of that old Hume v. [read post]
