R (British Sky Broadcasting Ltd) v Comr of Police of the Metropolis - definition. What is R (British Sky Broadcasting Ltd) v Comr of Police of the Metropolis
Diclib.com
قاموس على الإنترنت

%ما هو (من)٪ 1 - تعريف


R (British Sky Broadcasting Ltd) v Comr of Police of the Metropolis         
2000S BRITISH COURT CASE
R (British Sky Broadcasting Ltd) v Central Criminal Court; R (British Sky Broadcasting Ltd) v The Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis; R v Comr of Police of the Metropolis, ex p British Sky Broadcasting Ltd
was a 2014 judgment of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom. The court held that as inter partes proceedings created a lis between the parties (per Lewes), equal treatment (per Al Rawi) meant that ex parte evidence in general could not be adduced.
Open....         
  • Sky [[Minidish]]
BRITISH PAY TV AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMPANY WHICH SERVES THE UNITED KINGDOM
BritishSkyBroadcasting; Open....; Bskyb; BSKYB; Sky Digital (UK); Sky Digital UK; Open...; BSkyb; Sky (United Kingdom); Sky (UK); BskyB; BSKYb; Sky Digital (UK & Ireland); British Sky Broadcasting; Sky (UK & Ireland); British Sky Broadcasting Group Plc; British Sky Broadcasting Ltd; British Interactive Broadcasting; Sky United Kingdom; BSkyB; Sky (UK and Ireland); American Sky Broadcasting; Sky UK Limited; SKY UK; Sky Mobile; British Sky Broadcasting ltd; Stephen van Rooyen; Sky Glass
Open.... was an interactive digital television service, based on the satellite transmissions of BSkyB.
Waters v Comr of Police for the Metropolis         
UK LEGAL CASE
Waters v Metropolitan Police; Waters v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis; Waters v Comr of Police of the Metropolis
is a UK labour law case concerning victimisation for alleging rape, and whether the employee could claim this amounted to sex discrimination. It now falls under the Equality Act 2010 section 27.

ويكيبيديا

R (British Sky Broadcasting Ltd) v Comr of Police of the Metropolis
was a 2014 judgment of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom. The court held that as inter partes proceedings created a lis between the parties (per Lewes), equal treatment (per Al Rawi) meant that ex parte evidence in general could not be adduced.