Search for: "ENGLISH v. STATE"
Results 5601 - 5620
of 7,358
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
27 May 2011, 2:54 am
The issues for the Supreme Court concern the proper approach to be taken to an Article 13(b) defence in child abduction cases; and the interaction between the domestic approach to the Convention and that of the European Court of Human Rights, following the ECHR case of Neulinger and Shuruk v. [read post]
26 May 2011, 5:14 pm
With the scope being limited to the premises stated above, decisions of the SC in the matter of Bhatia International , Citation Infowares, Dozco v Doosan; Videocon v Union of India and Gujarat HC’s decision in Hardy Oil are analysed below. [read post]
26 May 2011, 9:00 am
ARTICLE V Neither of the contracting parties shall be bound to deliver up its own citizens under the stipulations of this convention, but the executive authority of each shall have the power to deliver them up, if, in its discretion, it be deemed proper to do so. [read post]
25 May 2011, 9:35 pm
Rick Nemcik Cruz kindly provided an English-language summary:Thank you very much for keeping me informed. [read post]
25 May 2011, 12:35 pm
State of Bihar v. [read post]
25 May 2011, 12:09 pm
State of Jammu & Kashmir reported in (1992) 4 SCC 217. [read post]
24 May 2011, 9:00 am
Ford, President of the United States of America, proclaim and make public the Treaty, Protocol of Signature, and the exchange of notes, to the end that they shall be observed and fulfilled with good faith on and after January 21, 1977, by the United States of America and by the citizens of the United States of America and all other persons subject to the jurisdiction thereof. [read post]
23 May 2011, 9:00 pm
Salem v. [read post]
23 May 2011, 1:00 pm
ARTICLE V The contracting Parties shall not be bound to delivery up their own citizens or subjects under the stipulations of this treaty. [read post]
22 May 2011, 11:20 pm
This Aarhus-derived provision requires member states to provide for a route for challenging decisions involving the EIA process. [read post]
22 May 2011, 7:00 pm
The Court of Appeal emphasised earlier this week in R v Dobson that “compelling evidence” does not mean that the evidence must be irresistible, or that absolute proof of guilt is required. [read post]
22 May 2011, 12:00 pm
R (Cart) v The Upper Tribunal; Eba v Advocate General for Scotland (Scotland); and R (MR (Pakistan)) v Secretary of State for the Home Department, heard 14 – 17 March 2011. [read post]
22 May 2011, 5:49 am
The point has been made in both English and German courts that public announcements by the impugned party in its own words carry less weight than judicial ones (Jameel (Mohammed) v Wall Street Journal Europe Sprl [2007] 1 AC 359 at 376). [read post]
21 May 2011, 8:03 am
NTPC v Singer states that in the absence of an express choice, the substantive law of arbitration would be the same as that of the contract. [read post]
20 May 2011, 10:19 am
(Orin Kerr) The Eleventh Circuit has handed down a new en banc decision, Gilbert v. [read post]
19 May 2011, 1:15 pm
The court in Deutsch v. [read post]
19 May 2011, 1:00 pm
In the event that extradition is denied on that basis, Article 3(2) requires the Requested State to submit the case to its competent authorities for the purpose of prosecution if the Requesting State so requests and if the laws of the Requested State so allow. [read post]
19 May 2011, 8:36 am
The 11th Circuit's en banc decision today in Gilbert v. [read post]
19 May 2011, 6:25 am
Negron v. [read post]
19 May 2011, 6:15 am
Take Kentucky v. [read post]
