Search for: "State v. Rome"
Results 361 - 380
of 709
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
25 May 2022, 5:01 am
To meet the high threshold of this intent, genocidal intent must be the only reasonable inference that can be made from the pattern of the state’s actions, according to the international court in Prosecutor v. [read post]
29 Mar 2018, 11:00 am
Ruggiu (2000), Prosecutor v, Kupreskic (2000), Prosecutor v Blaskic (2000), the Medi [read post]
26 Jul 2023, 5:50 am
The retained (modified) Rome I and II Regulations will thus be part of domestic law beyond the end of 2023. [read post]
28 Nov 2010, 1:38 am
After a short analysis of the current state of discussion, it is shown that the argument emanates from the erroneous assumption that the question of restitution in such cases is a matter of unjust enrichment according to Art. 10 Rome II Regulation as well as a topic of private international law concerning contractual obligations. [read post]
22 Jun 2009, 10:43 am
In a 1980 case called City of Rome, the court essentially held the same thing. [read post]
26 Feb 2012, 8:56 pm
The question to be decided in McGee v. [read post]
8 Nov 2022, 6:05 am
Applying Yerodia, the Appeals Chamber of the Special Court for Sierra Leone (“SCSL”) ruled in its Decision on Immunity from Jurisdiction, Prosecutor v. [read post]
6 Sep 2011, 7:04 am
In Rome in 1998, when the Statute that binds this court was overwhelmingly approved, over a hundred sovereign States decided that child recruitment and forcing them to participate in hostilities were, and I? [read post]
13 Oct 2023, 5:55 am
Myanmar and Ukraine v. [read post]
17 Mar 2015, 9:33 am
A current case that foreshadows this is the decision in Garcia v. [read post]
23 May 2019, 9:30 pm
Department of State and the U.S. [read post]
31 May 2009, 8:18 pm
Charges of genocide require dolus specialis, or a special intent, according to Article 6 of the Rome Statute. [read post]
31 May 2009, 11:17 pm
Charges of genocide require dolus specialis, or a special intent, according to Article 6 of the Rome Statute. [read post]
21 Oct 2012, 10:30 am
The first, The Episcopal Diocese of Fort Worth, et al. v. [read post]
7 Aug 2019, 12:43 am
PatentsIn Takeda v Roche: "Is it plausible? [read post]
30 Jul 2019, 9:04 am
| Beware of your old expert reports, as Henry Carr J allows hearsay expert evidence in Illumina v Ariosa | Still want to be a UPC judge? [read post]
6 Apr 2019, 9:46 am
Katfriend Nicoletta Epaminonda takes a loot at the Cypriot transposition of the Trade Mark Directive 2015/2436 and reflects on what the future might hold for trade marks in this Member State. [read post]
23 Apr 2013, 10:59 pm
Yes it is, the Grand Chamber of the European Court held on April 16th in Anton Las v. [read post]
11 Apr 2022, 9:01 pm
Two years later, the Court followed this up in Pierce v. [read post]
27 Jan 2024, 2:29 pm
(Marko Milanovic, ICJ Indicates Provisional Measures in South Africa v. [read post]
