Search for: "United States v. Dutch"
Results 81 - 100
of 763
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
5 Jul 2013, 8:25 am
Professor Seck has recently been considering ramifications of Kiobel v Royal Dutch Petroleum 569 U. [read post]
8 Jun 2011, 8:11 am
Today, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second... [read post]
13 Mar 2023, 5:31 am
Moreover, if the Supreme Court decides Türkiye Halk Bankasi A.S. v. [read post]
18 Nov 2016, 11:35 am
The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit issued an unpublished opinion last year in Waggoner v. [read post]
30 Nov 2017, 10:20 am
Yishai Schwartz provided an update on military commission proceedings in United States v. al-Nashiri. [read post]
29 Oct 2019, 1:51 pm
See United States v. [read post]
3 Feb 2017, 7:30 am
Royal Dutch Petroleum. [read post]
26 Sep 2014, 2:06 pm
Royal Dutch Petroleum, which established that this form of jurisdiction is available only for claims that “touch and concern the territory of the United States” with “sufficient force” to displace the presumption against the extraterritorial application of U.S. law. [read post]
17 Jan 2014, 7:24 am
United States: Supreme Court Review of Federal Statute Authorizing Restitution for Victims of Child Pornography. [read post]
23 Jun 2011, 6:53 pm
Wilders is guilty of saying nothing about Islam that you can’t say or hear in any bar in the United States (excepting enclaves in Los Angeles, San Francisco, and the Boston suburbs, where the speaker would lose tenure). [read post]
20 Mar 2009, 9:54 am
V. [read post]
24 Mar 2014, 9:35 am
Royal Dutch Petroleum Co., and potentially soon Bond v. [read post]
12 May 2015, 6:52 am
Royal Dutch Petroleum Co., and Bond v. [read post]
14 Apr 2012, 11:11 am
" United States v. [read post]
18 Feb 2020, 8:43 am
Recently, two cases State of Netherlands v Urgenda (December 20, 2019) and Juliana v. [read post]
9 Nov 2018, 12:04 am
Achmea and the CJEU’s Treatment of Intra-EU BITs The Achmea decision[6] was rendered following a reference from the German Bundesgerichtshof (federal court) to the CJEU.[7] Briefly, the case concerned the setting-aside of an ad-hoc investor-State arbitration, established under United Nations Commission for International Trade Law (‘UNCITRAL’) rules and seated in Frankfurt, between the Dutch insurance company Achmea BV and Slovakia. [read post]
3 Apr 2012, 12:46 am
Ever since the US Supreme Court ruled in Morrison et al v National Australia Bank Ltd et al that claimants not residing in the United States or American citizens who purchased shares on a foreign exchange can’t settle or litigate their case in the US, these parties have been seeking other jurisdictions to get their claims resolved. [read post]
16 Jul 2022, 11:16 pm
But in case he hasn't noticed, the Netherlands is not the 51st state of the United States but a member state of the European Union.In the EU, however,the standard is different. [read post]
23 Jul 2013, 9:20 pm
This is because application of the Alien Tort Statute, as announced in Kiobel, turns on whether a corporation’s actions “touch and concern” the United States. [read post]
26 Apr 2017, 7:26 am
Here's the abstract:The Supreme Court’s decision in Kiobel v. [read post]
