Search for: "Walker v. Hhs" Results 1 - 20 of 36
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
14 May 2012, 2:25 am by Laura Sandwell, Matrix.
Starting this morning in the Supreme Court is the appeal of Al-Sirri v Secretary of State for the Home Department, listed for two days in front of a panel of five (L Hope, L Walker, L Kerr, L Clarke, L Dyson). [read post]
30 Apr 2012, 4:25 am by Laura Sandwell, Matrix.
Starting today in the Supreme Court is the two day appeal of Oracle America Inc (formerly Sun Microsystems Inc) v M-Tech Data Ltd, listed to be heard by Lords Walker, Clarke, Sumption, Reed, and Carnwath. [read post]
8 May 2012, 3:58 am by Laura Sandwell, Matrix.
Starting on Tuesday 8 May 2012 in front of Lords Hope, Walker, Kerr, Clarke and Dyson is the hearing of Phillips v Mulcaire. [read post]
21 May 2012, 6:42 am by Laura Sandwell, Matrix.
Running from Monday 21 May until Thursday 24 May 2012 is the appeal of Rubin & anor v Eurofinance SA & ors, to be heard in Courtroom 1 of the Supreme Court by Lords Walker, Mance, Clarke, Sumption and Collins. [read post]
13 Mar 2024, 1:52 pm by NARF
Walker (Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act; Federal Tort Claims Act) Corrales v. [read post]
23 Apr 2012, 2:34 am by Laura Sandwell, Matrix.
R (HH) v Deputy Prosecutor of the Italian Republic, R (PH) v Deputy Prosecutor of the Italian Republic, Genoa, BH (AP) and another v The Lord Advocate and another (Scotland), KAS or H (AP) v The Lord Advocate and another (Scotland) and Genoa  Filipek-Kwasny v Polish Judicial Authority, heard 5 – 8 March 2012. [read post]
26 Mar 2012, 8:31 am by Laura Sandwell, Matrix.
R (HH) v Deputy Prosecutor of the Italian Republic, R (PH) v Deputy Prosecutor of the Italian Republic, Genoa, BH (AP) and another v The Lord Advocate and another (Scotland), KAS or H (AP) v The Lord Advocate and another (Scotland) and Genoa  Filipek-Kwasny v Polish Judicial Authority, heard 5 – 8 March 2012. [read post]
19 Jul 2010, 2:14 pm by Mitchell Silverman
HHS, that the federal government could not deny the benefits accorded to married couples to same-sex couples married under Massachusetts law. [read post]