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 -Accuracy
    • GDPR – Resources
    • California Consumer Privacy Act
  • About
    • What we do
    • Contact
    • Development
  • Advertising
    • Advertising
    • Donate
    • Statistics
  • Registration

Murray v Mccullough: QBNI 8 Jun 2016

[2016] NIQB 52
Bailii
Northern Ireland

Northern Ireland

Updated: 23 January 2022; Ref: scu.569883

Posted on January 23, 2022January 23, 2022 by dlsPosted in Northern IrelandTagged Northern Ireland

Post navigation

Previous Previous post: Niacro’s Application – Leave Stage: QBNI 5 Feb 2016
Next Next post: Danfoss And Sauer-Danfoss: ECJ 20 Oct 2011

Areas of Law:

  • Administrative (1,122)
  • Adoption (461)
  • Agency (620)
  • Agriculture (773)
  • Animals (305)
  • Arbitration (1,262)
  • Armed Forces (358)
  • Banking (1,416)
  • Benefits (3,518)
  • Capital Gains Tax (486)
  • Charity (383)
  • Child Support (309)
  • Children (5,385)
  • Civil Procedure Rules (315)
  • Commercial (1,423)
  • Commonwealth (3,082)
  • Company (3,022)
  • Constitutional (949)
  • Construction (1,171)
  • Consumer (740)
  • Contempt of Court (833)
  • Contract (6,114)
  • Coroners (421)
  • Corporation Tax (680)
  • Costs (3,550)
  • Crime (8,398)
  • Criminal Evidence (633)
  • Criminal Practice (3,313)
  • Criminal Sentencing (2,818)
  • Customs and Excise (1,686)
  • Damages (2,486)
  • Defamation (1,543)
  • Development (1)
  • Discrimination (2,629)
  • Ecclesiastical (307)
  • Education (1,063)
  • Elections (224)
  • Employment (12,721)
  • Environment (820)
  • Equity (961)
  • Estoppel (334)
  • European (12,950)
  • Evidence (517)
  • Extradition (1,589)
  • Family (2,883)
  • Financial Services (1,014)
  • Health (1,522)
  • Health and Safety (459)
  • Health Professions (1,928)
  • Housing (2,003)
  • Human Rights (19,659)
  • Immigration (56,354)
  • Income Tax (3,224)
  • Information (15,623)
  • Inheritance Tax (178)
  • Insolvency (3,044)
  • Insurance (1,249)
  • Intellectual Property (13,534)
  • International (956)
  • Ireland (18)
  • Judicial Review (584)
  • Jurisdiction (1,047)
  • Jury (1,771)
  • Land (5,293)
  • Landlord and Tenant (15,657)
  • Legal Aid (391)
  • Legal Professions (1,956)
  • Licensing (594)
  • Limitation (1,064)
  • Litigation Practice (7,051)
  • Local Government (1,630)
  • Magistrates (758)
  • Media (1,141)
  • Natural Justice (322)
  • Negligence (1,336)
  • News (49)
  • Northern Ireland (1,757)
  • Nuisance (460)
  • Personal Injury (2,906)
  • Planning (3,239)
  • Police (1,549)
  • Prisons (1,248)
  • Professional Negligence (1,619)
  • Rating (670)
  • Registered Land (823)
  • Road Traffic (1,211)
  • Scotland (16,745)
  • Stamp Duty (187)
  • Taxes – Other (2,256)
  • Taxes Management (1,381)
  • Torts – Other (2,759)
  • Transport (2,049)
  • Trusts (1,473)
  • Undue Influence (152)
  • Utilities (477)
  • VAT (5,534)
  • Vicarious Liability (248)
  • Wales (16)
  • Wills and Probate (1,781)

Recent Posts

  • Bellintani and Others v Commission (Judgment): ECJ 5 Apr 1979
  • Kobor v Commission: ECJ 5 Apr 1979
  • Simmenthal v Commission: ECJ 22 May 1978
  • Granaria v Council and Commission: ECJ 28 Mar 1979
  • BMW Belgium v Commission: ECJ 12 Jul 1979
  • Distillers v Commission: ECJ 10 Jul 1980
  • Martin v Commission (Judgment): ECJ 13 Feb 1979
  • Hugin v Commission: ECJ 31 May 1979
  • Authie v Commission: ECJ 10 Mar 1978
  • V v Commission: ECJ 14 Jun 1979
  • Deshormes v Commission: ECJ 1 Feb 1979
  • Denkavit v Commission: ECJ 5 Dec 1978
  • Commission v Italy: ECJ 11 Apr 1978
  • D’Auria v Commission: ECJ 1 Jun 1978
  • Commission v Netherlands: ECJ 11 Apr 1978
  • Stimming Kg v Commission: ECJ 10 Nov 1977
  • Ditterich v Commission: ECJ 12 Oct 1978
  • B P v Commission: ECJ 29 Jun 1978
  • Mollet v Commission: ECJ 13 Apr 1978
  • Commission v Italy: ECJ 21 Sep 1978
  • IFG v Commission: ECJ 14 Feb 1978
  • Jean Razanatsimba: ECJ 24 Nov 1977
  • Commission v Ireland: ECJ 22 May 1977
  • Agence Europeenne D’Interims v Commission: ECJ 23 Nov 1978
  • Herpels v Commission: ECJ 9 Mar 1978
  • Oslizlok v Commission: ECJ 11 May 1978
  • Commission v United Kingdom (Order): ECJ 21 May 1977
  • Tepea v Commission: ECJ 20 Jun 1978
  • De Roubaix v Commission: ECJ 11 May 1978
  • Commission v Italy C-147/77: ECJ 6 Jun 1978
  • Westfalischer Kunstverein v Hauptzollamt Munster (Judgment): ECJ 27 Oct 1977
  • Miller v Commission (Judgment): ECJ 1 Feb 1978
  • Van Den Branden v Commission: ECJ 13 Oct 1977
  • Italy v Commission: ECJ 10 May 1979
  • Italy v Commission: ECJ 5 Apr 1979
  • Salerno and Others v Commission: ECJ 13 Jan 1978
  • Commission v Belgium: ECJ 16 May 1979
  • Gilbeau v Commission: ECJ 5 Apr 1979
  • Commission v Belgium: ECJ 12 Oct 1978
  • B v Commission: ECJ 2 Oct 1979
  • Defrenne v Sabena Airlines: ECJ 15 Jun 1978
  • Koninklijke Scholten-Honig v Council and Commission: ECJ 5 Dec 1979
  • Verhaaf v Commission: ECJ 9 Nov 1978
  • Societe Pour L’Exportation Des Sucres v Commission: ECJ 10 May 1978
  • Unicme v Council: ECJ 16 Mar 1978
  • Agneessens v Commission: ECJ 26 Oct 1978
  • Nachi Fujikoshi v Council: ECJ 9 Nov 1977
  • Koyo Seiko v Council and Commission: ECJ 29 Mar 1979
  • Nippon Seiko v Council and Commission: ECJ 20 Oct 1977
  • Iso v Council: ECJ 29 Mar 1979

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.