Search for: "Grant v. Commonwealth"
Results 1201 - 1220
of 1,620
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
7 Apr 2011, 9:00 am
ARTICLE V (1) Extradition shall not be granted if: (a) the person sought would, if proceeded against in the territory of the requested Party for the offense for which his extradition is requested, be entitled to be discharged on the grounds of a previous acquittal or conviction in the territory of the requesting or requested Party or of a third State; or (b) the prosecution for the offense for which extradition is requested has become barred by lapse of time according to the law… [read post]
1 Apr 2011, 12:47 pm
Not in Farrey v. [read post]
31 Mar 2011, 1:00 pm
ARTICLE V (1) Extradition shall not be granted if: (a) the person sought would, if proceeded against in the territory of the requested Party for the offense for which his extradition is requested, be entitled to be discharged on the grounds of a previous acquittal or conviction in the territory of the requesting or requested Party or of a third State; or (b) the prosecution for the offense for which extradition is requested has become barred by lapse of time according to the law… [read post]
28 Mar 2011, 7:29 pm
Similarly the Georgia Supreme Court granted relief penalty phase relief in Nicholas Jason Bryant v. [read post]
28 Mar 2011, 7:30 am
Commonwealth, 181 Va. 520, 532 (1943). [read post]
26 Mar 2011, 5:40 am
EQT Production Co.In the matter of Legard et al. v. [read post]
25 Mar 2011, 7:33 am
The Kentucky Supreme Court order in Conway v. [read post]
23 Mar 2011, 6:26 am
As with most Commonwealth jurisdictions, Canada (except the province of Quebec) has followed the English law of defamation. [read post]
21 Mar 2011, 5:05 pm
The Reynolds defence, for example, has been discussed in courts across the Commonwealth, e.g. in Canada (Grant v Torstar [2009] SCC 61). [read post]
16 Mar 2011, 9:13 am
The Reynolds defence, for example, has been discussed in courts across the Commonwealth, e.g. in Canada (Grant v Torstar 2009), and others have seen statutory changes (e.g. a set of statutes across the Australian jurisdictions in 2005 – which gets mentioned in brief without citations or details at one point in the document). [read post]
14 Mar 2011, 9:22 pm
Commonwealth v. [read post]
14 Mar 2011, 7:53 am
For one in particular, I looked at the note I had taken and was stumped:Mohamed v. [read post]
13 Mar 2011, 8:37 pm
March 4, 2011) “A habeas petitioner was granted a writ as to his life sentences imposed under Va. [read post]
7 Mar 2011, 7:59 am
The petition, seeking review of Commonwealth v. [read post]
6 Mar 2011, 7:29 pm
In one of the higher profile civil appeals before the Virginia Supreme Court in the past year, On March 4, 2011 the Justices relieved the petitioners who filed the case of Johnson v. [read post]
27 Feb 2011, 7:33 pm
v. [read post]
25 Feb 2011, 10:08 am
This statute was explicated in the classic 1857 case Commonwealth v. [read post]
23 Feb 2011, 4:02 pm
Problem areas include what “unaware” means, the exclusion of electronic communications such as emails and the very broad common law definition of “publication” which has not changed since Duke of Brunswick v Hamer (1849) 14 QB 185. [read post]
21 Feb 2011, 4:07 pm
In Australia, legislation for the protection of journalists’ sources will go before the Commonwealth parliament[3]. [read post]
21 Feb 2011, 11:05 am
See State v. [read post]
