Search for: "Watkins v. Watkins (1983)" Results 1 - 20 of 38
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
15 Nov 2010, 2:14 am by sally
Watkins v Woolas [2010] EWHC 2702 (QB); [2010] WLR (D) 288 “S 106 of the Representation of the People Act 1983, which imposed the penalties for an election candidate found guilty of a corrupt or illegal practice, was compatible with the right to freedom of expression contained in art 10 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. [read post]
31 Dec 1969, 4:00 pm
  Litigation, Energy John Gilbert, Damian Watkin, Rob Meade view [read post]
9 Nov 2010, 10:00 pm by Rosalind English
Robert Elwyn Watkins v Philip James Woolas  [2010] EWHC 2702 (QB) 5 November 2010- read judgment The Election Court has ruled that the Labour MP for Oldham knowingly and deliberately misled the constituency and as a result his election is void under Section 106 of the Representation of the People Act (1983). [read post]
21 Dec 2016, 1:59 pm by Greg Mersol
On Sloan’s heels, the Northern District of Ohio addressed the same issues in Watkins v. [read post]
13 Apr 2011, 8:14 am by Francis Davey
Balthasar v Mullane was followed by the Court of Appeal again in Adams v Watkins (1990) 22 H.L.R. 107. [read post]
12 Apr 2010, 6:30 am by PaulKostro
Court Rules, comment 4 on R. 4:37-2 (2010) (citing Watkins v. [read post]
23 Apr 2015, 4:18 pm by INFORRM
The case which has most recently looked at section 106 of the Representation of the People Act 1983 (RPA) is Watkins v Woolas ([2010] EWHC 2702(QB)). [read post]
22 May 2023, 5:16 am by Roger Parloff
Two of these defendants—Jessica Watkins and Roberto Minuta—were charged with “impeding” officers during a civil disorder, a charge that carries a maximum five-year term as compared to the maximum 20-year term for assaulting officers with a dangerous weapon. [read post]