Search for: "State v. Curiale"
Results 1 - 20
of 32
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
19 Apr 2024, 12:20 am
Significantly, Linden J refers to R (Williamson) v Secretary of State [2005] UKHL15 and R (Begum) v Governors of Denbigh High School [2006] UKHL 15 as the two leading Article 9 cases in this jurisdiction. [read post]
13 Apr 2023, 12:53 am
Interestingly, the Singapore Court of Appeal in BBA v. [read post]
10 Oct 2021, 8:58 pm
While the concurring reasons in Vavilov stated at para 286 that “Curial deference is the hallmark of reasonableness review,” the majority stated at para 24 that legislatures cannot shield administrative decision-making entirely from curial scrutiny, as judicial review is protect under s. 96 of the Constitution Act, 1867. [read post]
22 Aug 2021, 11:07 pm
Although the concurrence in Vavilov maintained the notion of curial deference at para 286, the joint reasons stated at para 31 that “expertise is no longer relevant to a determination of the standard of review as it was in the contextual analysis” given the appropriate respect for legislative choice to delegate the issue to a tribunal. [read post]
7 Mar 2021, 6:40 pm
Court of Appeal stated in R. v. [read post]
16 Nov 2020, 5:42 am
The majority (for the benefit of non-UK readers, when there is a majority the law is to be understood to be stated on this matter by that majority in a manner as authoritative as if there had been unanimity across all five judges) considered that there was no choice of an applicable law pertinent to Art.3 of Rome I in the underlying contract by which Enka’s services had been engaged. [read post]
12 Nov 2020, 6:48 am
C v D [2007] EWCA Civ 1282). [read post]
29 Apr 2020, 6:59 am
Although the Supreme Court has not directly addressed the issue in depth, it has stated:"The specification of “place of arbitration” may have special significance in an International Commercial Arbitration, where the “place of arbitration” may determine which curial law would apply. [read post]
2 Jun 2019, 4:31 pm
Despite the controversy around these practices, it has never been discussed at the Supreme Court of Canada, until their recent decision in R. v. [read post]
19 Jul 2018, 1:56 am
The Court relied on McDermott International Inc v Burn Standard Co., where the Supreme Court held: “the 1996 Act makes provision for the supervisory role of courts, for the review of the arbitral award only to ensure fairness. [read post]
27 Aug 2017, 10:55 pm
Section 51 of the 1996 Act states:"Saving. [read post]
4 Aug 2017, 6:01 pm
"4(v)(i) (i) While proper law for arbitration agreement (Curial Law) is indisputably Singaporean Law, what is the proper law for the contract qua the said contract dated 10.9.2003? [read post]
12 Aug 2016, 3:03 pm
The case, Freddy Curial v. [read post]
14 Dec 2015, 4:09 pm
However, those early reforms were state-based. [read post]
16 Feb 2015, 9:59 am
Ltd v Daewoo Logistics [2015] EWHC 194 (Comm). [read post]
30 Dec 2012, 3:13 pm
When then New York's Insurance Commissioner Salvatore Curiale seized control of ELNY on April 16, 1991 and placed it in receivership, he stated: "The company is currently neither in an insolvent or impaired condition. . . . [read post]
7 Sep 2012, 4:43 am
The said section 1(2) read: "It extends to the whole of India (except the State of Jammu and Kashmir). [read post]
25 Jun 2012, 2:55 pm
Power In Doe v. [read post]
7 Jun 2012, 9:00 am
” State v. [read post]
7 May 2012, 11:00 am
Originally published in Italian (2007), the book has been translated to English by Thomas V. [read post]
