Back to Network
3
Shared Docs
3
Same-Page
3 / 3
Mentions
Document Mentions (3 shared documents)
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
eedings. • Norris v Government of the United States of America [2008] UKHL 16, [2008] 1 AC 920: Represented the Government of the United States in the House of Lords in the leading case on cartels and competition law, and the requirement of double criminality in extradition proceedings. • R (Bermingham) v Dire
ed value" when considering the facts of individual cases: Stehlins v Government of Latvia [2006] EWHC 1272 (Admin), para. 13. 67 Gomes para. 36 and Lisowski-v-Regional Court of Bialystock (Poland) [2006] EWHC 3227 (Admin), para. 9. 67 Gomes para. 36. " Woodcock v Government of New Zealand [2004] 1 WLR 47, para. 29; Gomes, para. 32; L
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
eedings. • Norris v Government of the United States of America [2008] UKHL 16, [2008] 1 AC 920: Represented the Government of the United States in the House of Lords in the leading case on cartels and competition law, and the requirement of double criminality in extradition proceedings. • R (Bermingham) v Dire
ed value" when considering the facts of individual cases: Stehlins v Government of Latvia [2006] EWHC 1272 (Admin), para. 13. 67 Gomes para. 36 and Lisowski-v-Regional Court of Bialystock (Poland) [2006] EWHC 3227 (Admin), para. 9. 67 Gomes para. 36. " Woodcock v Government of New Zealand [2004] 1 WLR 47, para. 29; Gomes, para. 32; L
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
eedings. • Norris v Government of the United States of America [2008] UKHL 16, [2008] 1 AC 920: Represented the Government of the United States in the House of Lords in the leading case on cartels and competition law, and the requirement of double criminality in extradition proceedings. • R (Bermingham) v Dire
ed value" when considering the facts of individual cases: Stehlins v Government of Latvia [2006] EWHC 1272 (Admin), para. 13. 67 Gomes para. 36 and Lisowski-v-Regional Court of Bialystock (Poland) [2006] EWHC 3227 (Admin), para. 9. 67 Gomes para. 36. " Woodcock v Government of New Zealand [2004] 1 WLR 47, para. 29; Gomes, para. 32; L
Sponsored
Mutual Connections (89)
Entities connected to both the House of Lords and Lisowski-v-Regional Court of Bialystock
United States
LOCATION6 w/ the·3 w/ Lisowski-v-Regional
Ghislaine Maxwell
PERSON6 w/ the·3 w/ Lisowski-v-Regional
Supreme Court
ORGANIZATION5 w/ the·3 w/ Lisowski-v-Regional
SA
Sanchez
PERSON5 w/ the·3 w/ Lisowski-v-Regional
High Court
ORGANIZATION5 w/ the·3 w/ Lisowski-v-Regional
Northern Ireland
LOCATION5 w/ the·3 w/ Lisowski-v-Regional
Michael Cohen
PERSON5 w/ the·3 w/ Lisowski-v-Regional
KA
Kakis
PERSON4 w/ the·3 w/ Lisowski-v-Regional
DE
Dewani
PERSON4 w/ the·3 w/ Lisowski-v-Regional
HA
Hafeez
PERSON4 w/ the·3 w/ Lisowski-v-Regional
OT
Othman
PERSON4 w/ the·3 w/ Lisowski-v-Regional
SB
Scott Baker
PERSON4 w/ the·3 w/ Lisowski-v-Regional
AD
Anand Doobay
PERSON4 w/ the·3 w/ Lisowski-v-Regional
BD
Brian Dempsey
PERSON4 w/ the·3 w/ Lisowski-v-Regional
Christian R. Everdell
PERSON4 w/ the·3 w/ Lisowski-v-Regional
YU
Yurov
PERSON4 w/ the·3 w/ Lisowski-v-Regional
IY
Ilya Yurov
PERSON4 w/ the·3 w/ Lisowski-v-Regional
Tollman
ORGANIZATION4 w/ the·3 w/ Lisowski-v-Regional
Russia
LOCATION4 w/ the·3 w/ Lisowski-v-Regional
Oboronenergosbyt JSC
ORGANIZATION4 w/ the·3 w/ Lisowski-v-Regional