Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'supreme'.
Found 9 results
-
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-40727400 -
3053548.thumb.jpg.6ea05a752ac6bbf38ae4e7be9676053a.jpg)
The following is taken from the Law Gazette website: https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/news/supreme-court-ruling-on-litigants-in-person-could-redraw-cpr/5063855.article -
We purchased 2 Supreme leather sofas from DFS in November 2016, and within 12 months the painted coating on the leather had removed from several areas at the seams, mostly on the side of the seats which are seldom used or areas that do not come into contact with the person sitting on them. We reported the problem to DFS and they sent out a DFS manager whom cleaned the areas and repainted them with touch up paint. The workmanship was very poor, the colour of the paint was not the same shade and the repair lasted no more than 5 weeks before it had worn off. The problem with the painted coati
-
To put it bluntly Councils have been saying to people faced with homelessness that you will have the same issues as the street homeless have now so are not more vulnerable. Also because you have these issues before you become homeless there will be no risk soi we do not have to help you. Judge says [naughty word]! http://nearlylegal.co.uk/blog/2015/05/vulnerability-a-fresh-start/ -
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36845617 This Supreme court ruling will affect how Insurers deal with claims where Policyholders have been found to have told lies. " Lying on an insurance claim should not necessarily invalidate it, the Supreme Court has said, in a judgement likely to affect all household policies.It said collateral lies - which are untrue, but do not affect the validity of the claim - can be acceptable. The judges voted by four to one to change one of the important principles behind current insurance law. The insurance industry called it a "blow for hone -
Currently in the active section of the Supreme Court is a case regarding the use of the wheelchair area on public transport in this case buses. See this link for the case >> http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2014/1573.html Short link >> http://preview.tinyurl.com/hjjhjyn Lord Justice Lewison : Introduction This appeal has attracted some public interest, so it is important to be clear about the issue. It is not about whether non-wheelchair users should move out of the wheelchair space on a bus in order to accommodate a passenger
-
http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/news/protect/2015/06/motorist-takes-parking-charge-challenge-to-highest-uk-court I would now argue that if any PPC try to use the current judgement in their claim that the defendant highlights that an appeal has now been filed and the reference to Bevis be inappropriate until the supreme court make a ruling. Let us hope common sense prevails. -
I have just read a thread which i can only contemplate as a travesty of natural justice Does anybody know if Richard Durkin has had his appeal in the Supreme Court, and if not, when the appeal is being heard. This matter really does need case law to decide the issue of unlawful defaults It is all to do with this case that was heard in Scotland RICHARD DURKIN v. DGS RETAIL LIMITED+HFC BANK PLC, 26 March 2008, Sheriff J K Tierney
-
SOURCE: http://www.equalityhumanrights.com/news/2013/june/commission-welcomes-supreme-court-ruling-on-armed-forces-and-human-rights-protection/ 19 June 2013 In a landmark judgment today (Wednesday 19 June) the Supreme Court ruled that British soldiers killed while serving in Iraq were still under UK jurisdiction and so were entitled to human rights protection to the extent that is reasonable and does not interfere with the demands of active service. Serving in the armed forces inevitably involves risks and dangers which our servicemen and women take on willingly. This ruling
