Search for: "Simms v. State" Results 41 - 60 of 90
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
19 Mar 2018, 6:46 am by ASAD KHAN
Applying Simms [1999] UKHL 33, he found that general or ambiguous statutory words are incapable of overriding fundamental rights. [read post]
1 Oct 2015, 7:13 am by Farrah Nagrampa
Sachs, in which the court will determine when an entity is an “agent” of a “foreign state” under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, and Ocasio v. [read post]
20 Oct 2016, 4:31 pm by INFORRM
  Lord Toulson noted the frequently quoted words of Lord Hoffmann in R v Secretary of State for the Home Office, Ex p Simms ([2000] 2 AC 115) that “Fundamental rights cannot be overridden by general or ambiguous words” and said importantly that “while Lord Hoffmann said that this presumption will apply “even” to the most general words, but I would say further that the more general the words, the harder it is likely to be to… [read post]
20 Oct 2016, 6:09 am by Dan Tench
  Lord Toulson noted the frequently quoted words of Lord Hoffmann in R v Secretary of State for the Home Office, Ex p Simms [2000] 2 AC 115 that “Fundamental rights cannot be overridden by general or ambiguous words” and said importantly that “while Lord Hoffmann said that this presumption will apply “even” to the most general words, but I would say further that the more general the words, the harder it is likely to be to rebut the… [read post]
11 Jan 2016, 1:33 pm by Steven Boutwell
§9:4831(C). [6] Simms Hardin Co., LLC v. 3901 Ridgelake Drive, L.L.C., 12-469 (La. [read post]
29 Dec 2008, 9:00 pm
 Last June, the United States Supreme Court determined that blank">Crawford v. [read post]