Search for: "English v. English"
Results 361 - 380
of 9,873
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
6 Mar 2011, 4:15 am
And in Staub v. [read post]
18 Jun 2024, 5:01 am
(Parisi v. [read post]
6 Mar 2013, 5:54 pm
He began by reminding the Court of its 2009 decision in Northwest Austin Municipal Utilities District No. 1 v. [read post]
12 Jul 2012, 8:31 am
There is no corresponding provision under English law. [read post]
7 Nov 2010, 6:32 pm
Not surprisingly, my Plain English inbox was filled this week with questions about Schwarzenegger v. [read post]
9 Aug 2022, 5:23 pm
The New York Times: “In Spanish in Latin America or in Arabic across the Middle East, a steady stream of Russian propaganda and disinformation continues to try to justify President Vladimir V. [read post]
31 Dec 2009, 4:43 pm
------- Title: American Needle v. [read post]
27 May 2011, 7:14 am
Tinklenberg and Fowler v. [read post]
26 Jul 2011, 12:17 pm
The case is Cape Flattery, Ltd. v. [read post]
31 Dec 2009, 4:40 pm
------- Title: Padilla v. [read post]
4 Oct 2007, 6:44 am
General Motors Corporation v Royal & Sun Alliance Insurance (2007) EWHC 2206 (Comm) is a rather convoluted case on whether a consent order, in the circumstances of the case, amounted to an exclusive jurisdiction agreement in favour of the English courts, and whether an application for an anti-suit injunction could therefore be granted. [read post]
13 Mar 2008, 2:06 am
Norris v Government of the United States of America [2008] UKHL 16; WLR (D) 81 “During the period from 1989 to 2000 price fixing was not illegal under English law so that it was not an extradition offence for the purposes of s 137 of the Extradition Act 2003. [read post]
7 Aug 2009, 2:01 am
Rubin and another v Eurofinance SAand others [2009] WLR (D) 282 “The Cross-Border Insolvency Regulations 2006, which gave effect to the UNCITRAL Model Law relating to cross-border insolvency, applied where the foreign bankruptcy proceedings related to a debtor which, according to English law, had no legal personality either as an individual or as a body corporate. [read post]
23 May 2008, 2:34 am
King v Serious Fraud Office Court of Appeal “A restraint order made in an English court after a request from a foreign prosecutor for such an order on property did not apply to property in Scotland. [read post]
26 Jul 2007, 2:08 am
Grovit v. [read post]
7 Aug 2012, 2:37 am
MA v JA (Attorney General intervening) [2012] EWHC 2219 (Fam); [2012] WLR (D) 246 “A ceremony of marriage conducted in England which did not comply with the requirements of the Marriage Act 1949 because the parties had failed to give notice to the registrar with the result that the marriage was solemnised without any certificate being issued, created a marriage which was entitled to be recognised as valid under English law.” WLR Daily, 27th July 2012 Source:… [read post]
3 Apr 2008, 1:38 am
Westminster City Council v IC and Others Court of Appeal “A judge did not have jurisdiction to make a declaration that a marriage based on lack of consent was not valid under English law, since such a marriage was voidable and not void ab intitio; the judge should have declared that the marriage was not recognised as a valid marriage in this jurisdiction. [read post]
7 May 2010, 2:31 am
NML Capital Ltd v Republic of Argentina Court of Appeal “An English Court had no jurisdiction to enforce a United States court judgment since there was no treaty between the two countries for the mutual recognition and enforcement of judgments; the appropriate way was to bring an action on the judgment in England to enforce it. [read post]
26 Feb 2024, 4:00 am
Independent of that, it could discern no irregularity, particularly given the fact that DR’s attorney had assured that court that no interpreter was needed -- because DR “could read English and that [DR] had discussed the case with counsel in English and reviewed the plea conditions in English,” and the record demonstrated that DR had a command of the English language.Given that “waiver,” the AT2 thought that DR’s plea was… [read post]
26 Jun 2017, 10:13 am
In Somerset v Stewart, 1772, English courts finally held that slavery was not recognised by English law, which led to the termination of slavery in England once and for all; and it was the influence of French courts’ decisions on the bestowal of freedom to foreign slaves that led to the reasoning of the English Court. [read post]
