Search for: "United States v. Daily"
Results 1 - 20
of 4,636
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
2 Aug 2007, 7:28 am
Edwards v Government of the United States of America [2007] EWHC 1877 (Admin) “In deciding whether there was dual criminality under the Extradition Act 2003, the domestic court was confined to the facts alleged in the offence specified in the extradition request. [read post]
24 Jul 2007, 2:19 am
Gibson v. [read post]
13 Mar 2008, 2:06 am
Norris v Government of the United States of America [2008] UKHL 16; WLR (D) 81 “During the period from 1989 to 2000 price fixing was not illegal under English law so that it was not an extradition offence for the purposes of s 137 of the Extradition Act 2003. [read post]
31 Jul 2008, 9:14 am
McKinnon v Government of the United States of America [2008] UKHL 59; [2008] WLR (D) 266 “A foreign prosecuting authority's plea bargain offer to an accused person whose extradition was sought, did not constitute an abuse of process unless the predicted consequences of refusing the offer were so extreme as to amount to a threat of unlawful action which imperilled the integrity of the extradition process. [read post]
1 Mar 2010, 3:50 am
Norris v Government of United States of America (No 2) [2009] UKSC 9; [2010] WLR (D) 52 “It was only if some quite exceptionally compelling feature, or combination of features, was present that interference with the right to family life under art 8(1) of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms consequent upon extradition would be other than proportionate to the objective that extradition served. [read post]
3 Dec 2010, 1:58 am
Salazar-Duarte v Government of the United States of America [2010] EWHC 3150 (Admin); [2010] WLR (D) 313 “For the purposes of s 103(9) of the Extradition Act 2003, the person whose extradition was sought was deemed to be informed of the extradition order against him when the solicitors acting on his behalf received a letter, whether by post, fax or e-mail, which informed him that the order had been made. [read post]
16 Jul 2014, 8:46 am
State of Michigan v. [read post]
4 Jan 2011, 2:07 am
Carvalho v Secretary of State for the Home Department; Secretary of State for the Home Department v Omar [2010] EWCA Civ 1406; [2010] WLR (D) 344 “A short term of imprisonment on the part of an EEA worker during his first five years in the United Kingdom meant that the time needed to establish a right permanently to reside had to begin anew after his imprisonment had concluded. [read post]
4 Jun 2016, 6:09 am
United States (1971) seems appropriate. [read post]
24 Feb 2014, 8:27 am
<> United States v. [read post]
26 Jan 2009, 2:38 am
R (Al-Saadoon and another ) v Secretary of State for Defence; [2009] WLR (D) 17 “Iraqi detainees held in a UK internment facility in Iraq on the authority of the local criminal court were not under the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom for the purposes of art 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights. [read post]
12 Jun 2012, 1:58 am
Patel and others v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2012] EWCA Civ 741; [2012] WLR (D) 174 “The decision of the Secretary of State for the Home Department to refuse an extension of leave to remain in the United Kingdom was not invalidated by the fact that she had made no removal direction in respect of the applicant at the same time as or shortly after the refusal of the extension application.” WLR Daily, 1st June 2012 Source:… [read post]
12 Jun 2012, 1:58 am
Patel and others v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2012] EWCA Civ 741; [2012] WLR (D) 174 “The decision of the Secretary of State for the Home Department to refuse an extension of leave to remain in the United Kingdom was not invalidated by the fact that she had made no removal direction in respect of the applicant at the same time as or shortly after the refusal of the extension application.” WLR Daily, 1st June 2012 Source:… [read post]
4 Mar 2009, 2:25 am
R (BA (Nigeria)) v Secretary of State for the Home Department; R (PE (Cameroon)) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2009] EWCA Civ 119; [2009] WLR (D) 77 “A right of appeal against the Home Office's refusal to revoke a deportation order was exercisable from within the United Kingdom. [read post]
22 Jun 2010, 1:25 am
FA (Iraq) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2010] EWCA Civ 696; [2010] WLR (D) 152 “Where a person who had been granted leave to enter or remain in the United Kingdom for a year or more appealed against the refusal of his claim for asylum under s 83 of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 he was entitled, by virtue of the principle of equivalence under Community law, to include the refusal of his claim for humanitarian protection in the… [read post]
29 May 2007, 2:25 am
R (Baia and another v. [read post]
22 Apr 2024, 8:15 am
STATE OF MARYLAND DEPARTMENT OF BUDGET AND MANAGEMENT, CENTRAL COLLECTION UNIT appeared first on Maryland Daily Record. [read post]
10 Jul 2009, 9:50 am
United States v. [read post]
22 Jun 2018, 2:24 pm
United States</em> appeared first on SCOTUSblog. [read post]
11 Dec 2015, 9:02 am
<> United States v. [read post]
