Skip to content

swarb.co.uk

May the law be with you – lex vobiscum

  • Law
    • More Recent Cases
    • e-Legal Gathering
    • Case Layout
    • FAQ
    • Searching
    • Areas of Law
    • law index
    • Courts
    • Reports
    • Judges
    • Case Names
  • Privacy
    • GDPR – Overall
    • Anonymity Orders
    • GDPR – Request to be ‘Forgotten’
    • Privacy – Users
    • GDPR – Content
    • GDPR – Legitimate Interests
    • Lawfulness of processing
    • Purposes Limitation
    • Cookie Policy
    • GDPR – Resources
  • About
    • What we do
    • Contact
    • Development
  • Advertising
    • Advertising
    • Donate
    • Statistics
  • Registration

An Driochead Ltd v Lorcan Nac Gadahann and Others, As The Trustees of Iontaobhas Na Gaelscolaiochta: QBNI 26 Jun 2013

[2013] NIQB 82
Bailii

Northern Ireland

Updated: 25 November 2021; Ref: scu.517511

Posted on November 25, 2021November 25, 2021 by dlsPosted in Northern IrelandTagged Northern Ireland

Post navigation

Previous Previous post: Webster, Regina v: CACD 10 Sep 2013
Next Next post: Lamey v Belfast Health and Social Care Trust: QBNI 29 Aug 2013

Buy Me a Coffee

Areas of Law:

  • Administrative (1,106)
  • Adoption (439)
  • Agency (613)
  • Agriculture (765)
  • Animals (301)
  • Arbitration (1,243)
  • Armed Forces (358)
  • Banking (1,399)
  • Benefits (3,500)
  • Capital Gains Tax (473)
  • Charity (378)
  • Child Support (303)
  • Children (5,157)
  • Civil Procedure Rules (366)
  • Commercial (1,410)
  • Commonwealth (3,072)
  • Company (2,992)
  • Constitutional (943)
  • Construction (1,161)
  • Consumer (725)
  • Contempt of Court (1,026)
  • Contract (6,032)
  • Coroners (407)
  • Corporation Tax (669)
  • Costs (3,468)
  • Crime (8,291)
  • Criminal Evidence (632)
  • Criminal Practice (3,306)
  • Criminal Sentencing (3,400)
  • Customs and Excise (1,658)
  • Damages (2,475)
  • Defamation (1,521)
  • Development (1)
  • Discrimination (2,807)
  • Ecclesiastical (299)
  • Education (1,054)
  • Elections (221)
  • Employment (14,962)
  • Environment (811)
  • Equity (955)
  • Estoppel (334)
  • European (12,948)
  • Evidence (510)
  • Extradition (1,489)
  • Family (2,788)
  • Financial Services (997)
  • Health (1,489)
  • Health and Safety (455)
  • Health Professions (1,895)
  • Housing (1,992)
  • Human Rights (19,422)
  • Immigration (70,931)
  • Income Tax (3,125)
  • Information (15,110)
  • Inheritance Tax (176)
  • Insolvency (2,992)
  • Insurance (1,240)
  • Intellecctual Property (1)
  • Intellectuaal Property (1)
  • Intellectual Property (13,466)
  • Internationaal (1)
  • International (946)
  • Ireland (18)
  • Judicial Review (584)
  • Jurisdiction (1,017)
  • Jury (2,220)
  • Land (5,204)
  • Landlord and Tenant (15,575)
  • Legal Aid (388)
  • Legal Professions (1,940)
  • Licensing (588)
  • Limitation (1,059)
  • Litigation Practice (6,930)
  • Local Governent (1)
  • Local Government (1,603)
  • Magistrates (746)
  • Media (1,127)
  • Natural Justice (321)
  • Negligence (1,330)
  • News (49)
  • Northern Ireland (2,940)
  • Nuisance (461)
  • Personal Injury (2,887)
  • Planning (3,192)
  • Police (1,531)
  • Prisons (1,234)
  • Professional Negligence (1,596)
  • Rating (655)
  • Registered Land (816)
  • Road Traffic (1,198)
  • Scotland (16,730)
  • Stamp Duty (182)
  • Taxes – Other (2,231)
  • Taxes Management (1,316)
  • Torts – Other (2,719)
  • Transport (2,023)
  • Trusts (1,444)
  • Undue Influence (152)
  • Utilities (465)
  • VAT (5,414)
  • Vicarious Liability (247)
  • Wales (16)
  • Wills and Probate (1,726)

Recent Posts

  • Pentikainen v Finland: ECHR 4 Feb 2014
  • Pagnozzi v Italy: ECHR 4 Feb 2014
  • Pereira Santos v Portugal: ECHR 4 Feb 2014
  • Sapozkovs v Latvia: ECHR 11 Feb 2014
  • Semikhvostov v Russia: ECHR 6 Feb 2014
  • Ovsjannikov v Estonia: ECHR 20 Feb 2014
  • Ostace v Romania: ECHR 25 Feb 2014
  • Sandu v The Republic Of Moldova: ECHR 11 Feb 2014
  • Ruiz Rivera v Switzerland: ECHR 18 Feb 2014
  • Petrovic v Serbia: ECHR 18 Feb 2014
  • Petrina v Croatia: ECHR 13 Feb 2014
  • Perez Lizaso v Finland: ECHR 27 Feb 2014
  • Monteiro Aires v Portugal: ECHR 4 Feb 2014
  • Mottola And Others v Italy: ECHR 4 Feb 2014
  • Oruk v Turkey (Judgment): ECHR 4 Feb 2014
  • Nosov And Others v Russia: ECHR 20 Feb 2014
  • Gulizar Tuncer Gunes v Turkey: ECHR 11 Feb 2014
  • Kilyen v Romania: ECHR 25 Feb 2014
  • Koroviny v Russia: ECHR 27 Feb 2014
  • Josef v Belgium: ECHR 27 Feb 2014
  • Loncar v Bosnia And Herzegovina: ECHR 25 Feb 2014
  • Masirevic v Serbia: ECHR 11 Feb 2014
  • Karaman v Germany: ECHR 27 Feb 2014
  • Novruz Ismayilov v Azerbaijan: ECHR 20 Feb 2014
  • Nicolae Augustin Radulescu v Romania: ECHR 11 Feb 2014
  • Necula v Romania: ECHR 18 Feb 2014
  • Lucic v Croatia: ECHR 27 Feb 2014
  • Mihaila v Romania: ECHR 11 Feb 2014
  • Nural Vural v Turkey: ECHR 11 Feb 2014
  • Karoly v Romania: ECHR 11 Feb 2014
  • Hajduk v Poland: ECHR 11 Feb 2014
  • Jalba v Romania: ECHR 18 Feb 2014
  • Cardoso Oliveira v Portugal: ECHR 4 Feb 2014
  • Affaire Cardoso Oliveira v Portugal: ECHR 4 Feb 2014
  • Benenati And Scillama v Italy: ECHR 4 Feb 2014
  • Contrada v Italy (No 2): ECHR 11 Feb 2014
  • Gabor Nagy v Hungary: ECHR 11 Feb 2014
  • Gheorghe Predescu v Romania: ECHR 25 Feb 2014
  • Dzhabrailov And Others v Russia: ECHR 27 Feb 2014
  • Cetic v Slovenia: ECHR 27 Feb 2014
  • Firstov v Russia: ECHR 20 Feb 2014
  • Franek v Slovakia: ECHR 11 Feb 2014
  • Cesnieks v Latvia: ECHR 11 Feb 2014
  • Avotins v Latvia: ECHR 25 Feb 2014
  • Berzins v Latvia: ECHR 25 Feb 2014
  • Gramada v Romania: ECHR 11 Feb 2014
  • Bayram Guclu v Turkey: ECHR 18 Feb 2014
  • Figueiredo Goncalves v Portugal: ECHR 18 Feb 2014
  • AL v Poland: ECHR 18 Feb 2014
  • Batmaz v Turkey: ECHR 18 Feb 2014

Meta

  • Log in
  • Entries feed
  • Comments feed
  • WordPress.org
swarb.co.uk is published by David Swarbrick of 10 Halifax Road, Brighouse West Yorkshire HD6 2AG. Tel: 0795 457 9992, 01484 380326 or email at david@swarb.co.uk

IMPORTANT:This site reports and summarizes cases. We do not provide advice. Before making any decision, you must read the full case report and take professional advice as appropriate. Only full case reports are accepted in court.

Proudly powered by WordPress Theme: Colinear by Automattic.