Search for: "Ace v. State"
Results 541 - 560
of 1,884
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
31 Jul 2009, 1:56 am
iStock_000000617148Medium.jpg In conspiracy to possess marijuana and illegal firearm possession prosecution, expert fingerprint testimony identifying the defendant's thumb print on guns and ammunition was admissible under FRE 702 and Daubert even though the defendant raised "questions regarding whether fingerprint analysis can be considered truly scientific in an intellectual, abstract sense"; circuit extensively explored the current argument regarding admissibility… [read post]
22 May 2019, 4:58 pm
Lord Carnwath traced the case law on “ouster” clauses back to Anisminic Ltd v Foreign Compensation Commission [1969] 2 AC 147, the widest reading of which was summarised by Lord Diplock in O’Reilly v Mackman [1983] 2 AC 279 as follows (emphasis added): “…if a tribunal whose jurisdiction was limited by statute or subordinate legislation mistook the law applicable to the facts as it had found them, it must have… [read post]
27 Jan 2020, 2:30 am
Halliburton Company v Chubb Bermuda Insurance Ltd (Formerly known as Ace Bermuda Insurance Ltd), heard 12-13 November 2019. [read post]
6 Sep 2019, 12:14 am
In particular, the court considered the deemed lawful taking of photographs by police officers as in R (Wood) v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis [2010] 1 WLR 123 and R (Catt) v Association of Chief Police Officers [2015] AC 1065. [read post]
5 Dec 2010, 9:59 pm
With human health at the apex of this system, the assessment of the measures adopted to secure any of these aims is not, as Lord Steyn suggested in R (Daly) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2001] 2 AC 532, a ”one size fits all” test. [read post]
21 May 2012, 7:50 am
They based their claim on Article 3 but relied by analogy on the high duty to investigate that arose under article 2 of the ECHR when a suicide had occurred as illustrated in R(Amin) v Secretary of State for the Home Office [2003] and in R (L (A Patient)) v Secretary of State for Justice [2009] AC 588. [read post]
22 Mar 2023, 11:43 am
Ace American Ins. [read post]
23 Nov 2015, 2:40 pm
* Why the Enlarged Board rejected the AC in SeptemberMerpel has finally had sight of the written decision of the Enlarged Board of Appeal (EBA) in which it rejected the request made by the Administrative Council (AC) chairman, Mr Kongstad, seeking the dismissal of a Board Member for the events leading up to the House Ban. [read post]
28 Nov 2017, 3:50 am
AC iii! [read post]
19 Feb 2015, 9:53 pm
Inc. v. [read post]
25 Jul 2018, 7:06 am
The judgment of Calveley v Chief Constable of Merseyside Police [1989] 1 AC 1228 was found to be instructive in this regard, where it was held that a Chief Constable did not, in principle, owe a duty of care to protect the economic and reputational interests of his officers in respect of the prosecution of an investigation or disciplinary proceedings brought against them. [read post]
12 Oct 2008, 12:55 pm
There was no need for an individual assessment of the proportionality of exercising this power in any given case because the appropriate bargain had already been struck and relied, by analogy, on Lord Scott in Quazi v LB Harrow [2004] 1 AC 983. [read post]
14 Apr 2009, 7:39 am
., LLC v. [read post]
23 May 2019, 3:31 pm
He currently is Co-Chair of the ACS Chicago Lawyer Chapter. [read post]
20 May 2008, 6:25 am
., Ltd. v. [read post]
25 Sep 2019, 4:41 pm
” A v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2005] 1 AC 68, Lord Bingham. [read post]
16 Jan 2012, 9:09 am
Foskett J observed that no feature of the Strasbourg jurisprudence has gone so far as to impose the kind of obligation contended for in this case and that it is not open to the domestic courts to move ahead of the European Court of Human Rights in this regard (invoking the principle in R (Ullah) v Special Adjudicator [2004] 2 AC 323), a principle which has found further expression in Regina (Al-Skeini and others) v Secretary of State for Defence [2008] 1… [read post]
18 Dec 2013, 7:08 am
In the meantime England have managed to retain (yay) and then lose (boo) the Ashes, so it just goes to show that there are worse things in the world than tardy blog writers.The issue in the two cases is neatly stated by Kitchin LJ at [2]:“The central issue on this appeal is whether the decisions in Manek and Desnousse continue to bind this court in the light of the decisions of the Supreme Court in Manchester City Council v Pinnock [2010] UKSC 45, [2011] 2 AC 104 and… [read post]
18 Dec 2013, 7:08 am
In the meantime England have managed to retain (yay) and then lose (boo) the Ashes, so it just goes to show that there are worse things in the world than tardy blog writers.The issue in the two cases is neatly stated by Kitchin LJ at [2]:“The central issue on this appeal is whether the decisions in Manek and Desnousse continue to bind this court in the light of the decisions of the Supreme Court in Manchester City Council v Pinnock [2010] UKSC 45, [2011] 2 AC 104 and… [read post]
22 Jan 2018, 4:11 pm
Forum non conveniens The Claimant relied on EU case law (Owusu v Jackson (C-281/2002) and Maletic v lastminute.com GmbH (C-478-12)) to argue that the court was precluded from considering forum non conveniens issues. [read post]
