Search for: "English v. English"
Results 8341 - 8360
of 11,204
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
19 Jun 2011, 8:02 pm
Circuit Court of Appeals case on this issue, Garcia v. [read post]
17 Jun 2011, 10:05 am
Vinogradoff, English Society in the Eleventh Century, p. [read post]
17 Jun 2011, 9:35 am
Monday’s decision in Janus Capital Group, Inc. v. [read post]
17 Jun 2011, 7:17 am
I went to a German course on Word for Windows, since when I have often muttered to myself Vörtt. [read post]
17 Jun 2011, 1:29 am
This note compares the reasoning of the English court in Shamil Bank v. [read post]
16 Jun 2011, 7:24 am
Last week the Centre for Disability Law & Policy at NUI Galway and the Harvard Law School Project on Disability ran a Summer School entitled “The United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities – From Paper Rules to Action”. [read post]
15 Jun 2011, 5:52 pm
In coming to this decision the Court had regard to the English cases of Hayward v. [read post]
15 Jun 2011, 12:43 pm
Not so for Flores-Villar v. [read post]
15 Jun 2011, 9:00 am
ARTICLE V Extradition shall not be granted in any of the following circumstances: 1. [read post]
15 Jun 2011, 7:47 am
On Monday in United States v. [read post]
15 Jun 2011, 4:00 am
The case of the day is Capital Airline Engine Leasing, LLC v. [read post]
14 Jun 2011, 11:30 pm
A. v. [read post]
14 Jun 2011, 8:53 pm
In today’s case (AB v. [read post]
14 Jun 2011, 9:00 am
ARTICLE V A fugitive criminal shall not be surrendered under the provisions hereof when, by lapse of time, he is exempt from prosecution or punishment for the crime or offence for which the surrender is asked, according to the laws of the country from which the extradition is demanded, or when his extradition is asked for the same crime or offence for which he has been tried, convicted or acquitted in that country, or so long as he is under prosecution for the same. [read post]
14 Jun 2011, 7:53 am
V. [read post]
14 Jun 2011, 7:53 am
V. [read post]
14 Jun 2011, 6:48 am
Hmmmm . . .In Gonzales v. [read post]
14 Jun 2011, 3:29 am
If there is a sliding scale of importance involved, then each of these words “paramount”, “the/a primary” etc should be clearly allotted their appropriate level so that practitioners and parties understand their chances in court.However, when the Grand Chamber of the Strasbourg Court attempted to do something like this in Neulinger and Shuruk v Switzerland [2011] 1 FLR 122, it seems to have caused great consternation by concluding… [read post]
13 Jun 2011, 3:34 pm
The main opinion in this case references Troxel v. [read post]
