Search for: "United States v. Lord" Results 101 - 120 of 1,507
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
27 Aug 2010, 10:13 am by Adam Wagner
Patel, R (on the application of) v Lord Chancellor [2010] EWHC 2220 (Admin) (27 August 2010) – Read judgment The wife of the purported ringleader of the ’7/7? [read post]
5 Apr 2016, 7:05 am by Liah Caravalho
The event will mark the 50th anniversary of the United States Supreme Court decision, Miranda v. [read post]
9 Apr 2008, 2:13 am
Today the United Kingdom's Court of Appeal (Civil Division) released its judgment in AS & DD v Secretary of State for the Home Department, which concerned the lawfulness of the deportation of the applicant to Libya, pursuant to a Memorandum of Understanding with the proposed receiving state. [read post]
27 Mar 2019, 5:28 am by Brian Cordery
Brian Cordery and Claire Phipps-JonesThe UK Supreme Court today handed down its decision in Actavis v ICOS. [read post]
21 Aug 2010, 12:00 am by Sex Offender Issues
Before O'Meara's resentencing, the Supreme Court of the United States decided in Blakely v. [read post]
1 Nov 2011, 3:00 am by Ted Folkman
The case of the day is United States v. [read post]
16 Oct 2011, 5:14 am by Hugh Tomlinson QC, Matrix Law
   This is only the second time that the highest court has considered the application of the “responsible publication in the public interest”, first established by the House of Lords in Reynolds v Times Newspapers ([2001] 2 AC 127) nearly 12 years ago. [read post]
16 Oct 2011, 5:14 am by Hugh Tomlinson QC, Matrix Law
It has been forcefully argued that the decision of the Court of Appeal is inconsistent with the decision of the House of Lords in Jameel v Wall Street Journal ([2007] 1 AC 359).  [read post]
31 Oct 2016, 8:35 am by Charlotte Bamford
Particular regard was given to the case of Soering v United Kingdom (1989) 11 EHRR 439, where it was held that allowing an extradition of a party to the United States would constitute a violation of that person’s Article 3 rights, as he would be exposed to the risk of the application of the death penalty as a direct consequence of the extradition. [read post]
2 Mar 2011, 7:56 am by christopher
Finally, it chides both sets of attorneys for failing to cite the United States Supreme Court case of DASTAR CORP. v. [read post]
10 Nov 2011, 3:54 am by Kirsten Sjvoll, Matrix Chambers
On Tuesday 7 November, the Supreme Court (Lady Hale and Lords Walker, Brown, Mance, and Dyson) heard the appeal of the parents of a young woman, Melanie Rabone, who committed suicide while on home release from a psychiatric unit at Stepping Hill Hospital. [read post]
1 Nov 2019, 9:16 am
It will be the whole or, if it is divided into economic units, the relevant unit of the employer's business" (para. 41). [read post]
6 Dec 2016, 1:45 am by Blog Editorial
  Lord Pannick QC says it is no answer for the Government to say that the long title to the 1972 Act “says nothing about withdrawal“. 16:04: Lord Pannick QC refers to the case of Robinson v Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, which he submits supports a “flexible response” to constitutional developments. [read post]
18 Nov 2009, 2:19 pm by Rosalind English
What amounts to “positive action” will no doubt depend upon the circumstances of a particular case and, in some circumstances, the state may be required to take positive steps to prevent ill-treatment at the hands of others (see, e.g., R (Bagdanavicius) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2005] UKHL 38 at [24] per Lord Brown of Eaton-under-Heywood, E v Chief Constable of the Royal Ulster Constabulary [2008] UKHL 66 at [44] per… [read post]
30 Nov 2015, 1:00 pm by Thomas G. Heintzman
The recent judgment of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom in Cavendish Square Holding BV v Talal El Makdessi is a must-read for anyone involved in contract law. [read post]
7 Feb 2019, 4:47 pm by INFORRM
A law which confers a discretion is not in itself inconsistent with this requirement, provided the scope of the discretion and the manner of its exercise are indicated with sufficient clarity to give the individual protection against interference which is arbitrary: Goodwin v United Kingdom (1996) 22 EHRR 123 , para 31; Sorvisto v Finland , para 112. [read post]